Best Division in 2006? (1 Viewer)

[thayman]

So where's everyone that was pencilling in the NFC East as the toughest division at the start of the season? That collapse was about the easiest thing to possibly foresee, all of those teams are so finnicky. Any time we're talking about one of them being the best team in the NFC you can just about guarantee that 3 weeks later we'll be talking about what has gone so wrong with them, if their coach should be fired, if their QB should be benched, etc.It's an endless rotating cycle of those teams, I've been saying it for 2 years now.

3 out of the 4 teams from the NFC East should be in the playoffs.

3 of 4 are going to barely limp in in the super-weak NFC. Hardly impressive.

It depends on what stats you like I guess, some would argue that making the playoffs is better than missing out, a ugly win is better than a pretty loss. Would you rather be limping in the Super-weak NFC and getting a playoff berth? Or sitting home for the playoffs?ETA that I find it pretty impressive since the NFC East is the first division to have 3 teams in the playoffs since the re-alignment.

Which I would rather be doing has absolutely no correlation as to which team is actually better. If the AFC West were in the NFC they'd have 3 playoff teams as well, and they did it with a tougher schedule. 3 playoff teams from the NFC East but not from the AFC West has absolutely nothing to do with how good those teams are, and everything to do with how lucky they are that so many other teams around them are borderline inept.

Luck is part of football. By your argument the Colts have been the best team the past few years. If that does not translate into post-season success no one cares.At the end of the year your goal is to first get to the playoffs, then to the superbowl. The NFC East has 3/4 of its teams representing the postseason.

That's not even an argument. Saying the NFC East is better because they're weaker records with a weaker schedule netted them more playoff berths in the weaker conference is no different than saying the NFC East is better because they have more teams located in Texas.Sure luck is a part of football, but in a conversation like this luck in terms fo where the teams are located in is in no way any indication of which team/division is better. If a 7-9 team were to make the playoffs while an 11-5 team missed out, would that make the 7-9 team better? Not even in the biggest fantasy world imagineable it wouldn't.If the Chargers were left out of the playoffs because there were some secret stipulation that teams that play 6 games in San Diego when the temperature is greater 92 degrees at 4:57pm are disqualified from the playoffs would that make the 8-8 Giants better than them? It in no way, shape, or form has any effect or is any indication of how good those two teams actually are.

Would you disagree that the best teams make it to the postseason?

 

[PMENFAN]

So where's everyone that was pencilling in the NFC East as the toughest division at the start of the season? That collapse was about the easiest thing to possibly foresee, all of those teams are so finnicky. Any time we're talking about one of them being the best team in the NFC you can just about guarantee that 3 weeks later we'll be talking about what has gone so wrong with them, if their coach should be fired, if their QB should be benched, etc.It's an endless rotating cycle of those teams, I've been saying it for 2 years now.

3 out of the 4 teams from the NFC East should be in the playoffs.

3 of 4 are going to barely limp in in the super-weak NFC. Hardly impressive.

It depends on what stats you like I guess, some would argue that making the playoffs is better than missing out, a ugly win is better than a pretty loss. Would you rather be limping in the Super-weak NFC and getting a playoff berth? Or sitting home for the playoffs?ETA that I find it pretty impressive since the NFC East is the first division to have 3 teams in the playoffs since the re-alignment.

Summer school has a valdectorian. But, is it impressive to win? Somebody has to claim the playoff berths. Put it this way. If the Cowboys and Giants were in any division in the AFC, they're not even tied for a Berth. They got in by default, not because of achievement. Is it impressive? Maybe to you, but not to anybody else. They may even make a run, because the competition is so weak. Dallas, the higher of the two wild cards, lost at home today, to a 2-10 Detroit team, when Dallas was still fighting for the division, at 9-6. That should say it all for you. I think I mentioned earlier.. Is it impressive when you have to win in week 17 to get to 8-8, and still hold out for tiebreakers, or a Green Bay loss, to clinch a playoff berth? Not in my book; No matter how many teams from the division are in the playoffs. Yes, they're in. I say one standing after week 1 of playoffs, and 0 after week 2.

 

[PMENFAN]

So where's everyone that was pencilling in the NFC East as the toughest division at the start of the season? That collapse was about the easiest thing to possibly foresee, all of those teams are so finnicky. Any time we're talking about one of them being the best team in the NFC you can just about guarantee that 3 weeks later we'll be talking about what has gone so wrong with them, if their coach should be fired, if their QB should be benched, etc.It's an endless rotating cycle of those teams, I've been saying it for 2 years now.

3 out of the 4 teams from the NFC East should be in the playoffs.

3 of 4 are going to barely limp in in the super-weak NFC. Hardly impressive.

It depends on what stats you like I guess, some would argue that making the playoffs is better than missing out, a ugly win is better than a pretty loss. Would you rather be limping in the Super-weak NFC and getting a playoff berth? Or sitting home for the playoffs?ETA that I find it pretty impressive since the NFC East is the first division to have 3 teams in the playoffs since the re-alignment.

Which I would rather be doing has absolutely no correlation as to which team is actually better. If the AFC West were in the NFC they'd have 3 playoff teams as well, and they did it with a tougher schedule. 3 playoff teams from the NFC East but not from the AFC West has absolutely nothing to do with how good those teams are, and everything to do with how lucky they are that so many other teams around them are borderline inept.

Luck is part of football. By your argument the Colts have been the best team the past few years. If that does not translate into post-season success no one cares.At the end of the year your goal is to first get to the playoffs, then to the superbowl. The NFC East has 3/4 of its teams representing the postseason.

That's not even an argument. Saying the NFC East is better because they're weaker records with a weaker schedule netted them more playoff berths in the weaker conference is no different than saying the NFC East is better because they have more teams located in Texas.Sure luck is a part of football, but in a conversation like this luck in terms fo where the teams are located in is in no way any indication of which team/division is better. If a 7-9 team were to make the playoffs while an 11-5 team missed out, would that make the 7-9 team better? Not even in the biggest fantasy world imagineable it wouldn't.If the Chargers were left out of the playoffs because there were some secret stipulation that teams that play 6 games in San Diego when the temperature is greater 92 degrees at 4:57pm are disqualified from the playoffs would that make the 8-8 Giants better than them? It in no way, shape, or form has any effect or is any indication of how good those two teams actually are.

Would you disagree that the best teams make it to the postseason?

Absolutely. Often better teams are left out of the postseason because of divisional/conference alighnemt. This is a classic year of such. Happens in baseball every year where the wild card runner up is better than at least one, and often two, of the division winners. Hockey and Basketball rarely, because half of the league is in the playoffs.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Would you disagree that the best teams make it to the postseason?

I would absolutely, 100% disagree with that without even a lick of hesitation. That may be the easiest leading question I've ever gotten. Do you mean to insinuate that the best teams do always make it to the postseason? Because lol...that would be a heckuva tough argument to make.Even putting all the other countless improbabilities aside, to do so you would be contending that in each of the last 40 years 6 of the 12 best teams in the NFL were from the AFC, and 6 of the 12 best teams in the NFL were from the NFC (actual numbers adjusted for whatever the current playoff format was, but you get the point) and that there were never more or less than exactly 50% of the best teams in the NFL in the AFC and never more or less than exactly 50% of of the best teams in the NFL in the NFC.I won't go through and calculate the actual probability of that using the numbers, but I believe you would have a significantly better probability of winning the lottery three times in a row than you would of that happening.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

FreeBaGel, do you agree with my last two statements above?

Or is that simply an indictment of the NFC?I am sure we can all agree that the NFC-E is the best division in the NFC.

1) Yes.2) I have the NFC-E and NFC-S pretty close. I've got N.O. ahead of Philly (who I've said all year is the best team in the NFC East) with Dallas, NYG, Car, and ATL all being fairly close with a bit of an edge to Dallas. NFC-E probably wins the tiebreaker with Wash being quite a bit better than lackluster TB (both of whom btw I said were virtual locks to miss the playoffs this year despite their success last year).