Who's Going To The Super Bowl (1 Viewer)

[The Moz]

NE had Indy beaten @ Indy if not for some awful calls by BB. He won't do that again. NoLa has yet to get beat

will be a GREAT SNF or MNF... next week

 

[switz]

NE had Indy beaten @ Indy if not for some awful calls by BB. He won't do that again. NoLa has yet to get beat

One = some?Please - Indy won that game despite playing horribly through the third quarter. But then were able to drive for 3 TDs in the 4th quarter, NE couldn't stop them.

If you want to play the "if not" game - NE wouldn't have been able to stop Manning if not for two terribly thrown balls by Manning. The score would have been 49 to 34 if not for two picks by Manning that would have ended up as TDs. It could go on and on.

As far as NoLa has yet to get beat? The Colts have yet to get beat, no mater how you spin it. And if you want to say the Colts came close to losing, so did NoLa. Against the Stl Lambs, it was close, NO would have lost on the last play had Bulger not thrown an incompletion. Again, you can play the what if game all you want. Bottom line, Colts and Saints are both undefeated.

ETA - correct my wrong timeline on the scoring

 

[Doug B]

I'm also still ready for Favre to break down at the end of the season. The back end of their schdule is tougher than the front part.

This is the elephant in the NFC's living room. Favre could be healthy and look great in week 13 or something, then just fall off a cliff afterward. Then you find out in the offseason that he was hurt. Happened before. Flip side: if something were to happen to Brees, the Saints are done.

 

[PatsFanCT]

NE had Indy beaten @ Indy if not for some awful calls by BB. He won't do that again. NoLa has yet to get beat

One = some?Please - Indy won that game despite playing horribly through the third quarter. But then were able to drive for 3 TDs in the 4th quarter, NE couldn't stop them.

If you want to play the "if not" game - NE wouldn't have been able to stop Manning if not for two terribly thrown balls by Manning. The score would have been 49 to 34 if not for two picks by Manning that would have ended up as TDs. It could go on and on.

As far as NoLa has yet to get beat? The Colts have yet to get beat, no mater how you spin it. And if you want to say the Colts came close to losing, so did NoLa. Against the Stl Lambs, NO was losing until about 4 minutes left in the game, and they scored, but then would have lost on the last play had Bulger not thrown an incompletion. Again, you can play the what if game all you want. Bottom line, Colts and Saints are both undefeated.

The Colts won, fair and square, but the Pats didn't lose because of that "call". They lost because Maroney couldn't hold onto the ball on the way into the end zone, or because Brady threw a pick, again, in the end zone. Yes, the Colts won, but the Patriots pretty much had their way with them the entire game, and as a Pats fan, I do not fear going back to Indy for the championship game. I don't fear Indy one bit. We'll see how they do Monday night against NO, because they will be facing either NO or the Vikings in the Super Bowl.

 

[Doug B]

The Saints are a little more one-dimensional. If you can find a way to slow down Brees then you can beat them.

The Bills and Buccaneers both pretty much stopped Brees (under 200 yds in both) ... and the Saints stomped them both.I think opponents' chances are slightly better if they tilt their defenses in favor of stopping the Saints' run game. At least if Brees is airing it out, he could have an off day and throw picks, or the WRs can have the dropsies, or something. Then again, Brees & Co. could also go off

 

[PatsFanCT]

I seriously think the Bengals have a shot. That team believes they can beat anybody, has a really good defense and a complete offense. Two fluke fumbles cost them that game against Oakland and they'll learn from it. Indy has some holes and NE really isn't that consistantly good this year. I'll never believe in a Norv Turner coached team, so SD is out for me.

I'm a cointoss on Minnesota or Saints for the NFC. I love the Saints, but dang the Vikes are solid top to bottom.

Really? So having first and goal, then settling for a FG and missing it had nothing to do with the loss?

 

[switz]

NE had Indy beaten @ Indy if not for some awful calls by BB. He won't do that again. NoLa has yet to get beat

One = some?Please - Indy won that game despite playing horribly through the third quarter. But then were able to drive for 3 TDs in the 4th quarter, NE couldn't stop them.

If you want to play the "if not" game - NE wouldn't have been able to stop Manning if not for two terribly thrown balls by Manning. The score would have been 49 to 34 if not for two picks by Manning that would have ended up as TDs. It could go on and on.

As far as NoLa has yet to get beat? The Colts have yet to get beat, no mater how you spin it. And if you want to say the Colts came close to losing, so did NoLa. Against the Stl Lambs, NO was losing until about 4 minutes left in the game, and they scored, but then would have lost on the last play had Bulger not thrown an incompletion. Again, you can play the what if game all you want. Bottom line, Colts and Saints are both undefeated.

The Colts won, fair and square, but the Pats didn't lose because of that "call". They lost because Maroney couldn't hold onto the ball on the way into the end zone, or because Brady threw a pick, again, in the end zone. Yes, the Colts won, but the Patriots pretty much had their way with them the entire game, and as a Pats fan, I do not fear going back to Indy for the championship game. I don't fear Indy one bit. We'll see how they do Monday night against NO, because they will be facing either NO or the Vikings in the Super Bowl.

You mean the second or third quarter?End of 1st quarter: 7-7 (7-7 scored)

End of 2nd quarter: 24-14 (17-7 scored)

End of 3rd quarter: 24-14 (0-0 scored)

End of 4th quarter: 34-35 (10-21 scored)

As far as I can tell, the Pats got a lead in the second, which allowed them to play against the pass only in the third, and that caused problems for the Colts. However, in the 4th the Colts came back. I only saw the 4th quarter of the game, was working late on a project. But everyone I spoke to said the Pats seemed to have the Colts number in the third. While I watched in the 4th, the Colts seemed to be able to do anything they wanted against NE.

I have no problem with Pats fans not fearing Indy. Even with 9 seconds left on the clock in that game, I didn't believe the Colts had won it. As far as I'm concerned, if you've got Randy Moss on your team, any QB can heave it down the field, and Moss can make a play. So I didn't think it was over.

But here's the truth: While Pats fans may not fear Indy, Belichick does. He didn't want Peyton to touch the ball again, which is why he went for it on the 4th down.

 

[Aaronl5]

Everyone is overlooking Arizona again. They could end up the number 2 seed.

 

[Tanner9919]

I listed all the teams that are currently .500 or better. I don't see either of the undefeated teams making it. Would pick Pats and Vikings.

nice poll!I went with Chargers/Vikings. Manning can't be trusted in playoff games, Vikings have perhaps the best defensive of the playoff-bound teams,and we know defenses win championships. Patriots might get sniped by a lower seeded playoff team ( perhaps Miami or even Pittsburgh?)Chargers can't be stopped right now..they're on fire..they're always a late bloomer, and pour it on in Nov-dec-jan..they can run with any of the AFC teams...Giants/Cowboys/Eagles are pretenders...they're not going anywhere..Saints will be one-n-done..get the bye,lose their first playoff game, there's one team like that, every year ( see Tenn last season) Saints have no defense.Minnesota , with AP, would run all over the them..and the Vikings front 7 can't be stopped by the Saints O-line..I like Az to make some noise in the NFC..but in the end, I think Chargers/Vikings

 

[Jewell]

I voted NE-Minny.

The Vikings are as complete and as good as any team in the league right now including the two undefeateds. The Vikes' sole loss was a tight game, on the road, at the defending Superbowl Champs. They're stacked on both sides of the ball, and Percy Harvin is a game changer on special teams.

I see the Pats hitting stride by the Playoffs (even if they lose this week in New Orleans). The back half of their D and Vollmer on the O-line are all still young. I see them improving as the season wears on. I also see Belichick going back to Sammy Morris because Maroney's developed an annoying little fumbling habit.

 

[Ghost Rider]

As far as NoLa has yet to get beat? The Colts have yet to get beat, no mater how you spin it. And if you want to say the Colts came close to losing, so did NoLa. Against the Stl Lambs, NO was losing until about 4 minutes left in the game, and they scored, but then would have lost on the last play had Bulger not thrown an incompletion. Again, you can play the what if game all you want. Bottom line, Colts and Saints are both undefeated.

Uh, what? The Saints were NOT losing to the Rams at ANY point in that game. The Rams NEVER had the lead. I love it when you lie about stuff to try and make a point.

 

[gianmarco]

For those of you saying the NO defense can't stop anyone:

As pointed out above, NO lost Sedrick Ellis in Week 8. NO lost Kendrick Clancy in week 9. For those not familiar with the Saints, those were the starting DT's.

In week 10, NO lost Greer and Sharper. In week 11, they lost Tracy Porter. For those not familiar with the Saints, those were the starting CB's and their starting FS.

That's essentially HALF of their starting defense (5 of 11 starters) over the last 4 weeks.

So, through week 7, the defense was mostly healthy. In that time, here were the leading rushers:

Week 1 -- Kevin Smith - 20 yds

Week 2 -- Westbrook - 52 yds

Week 3 -- Fred Jackson - 71 yds

Week 4 -- T. Jones - 48 yds

Week 6 -- A. Bradshaw - 48 yds

Week 7 -- Ricky Williams 80 yds

And then (of course, with Ellis then Clancy out):

Week 8 -- Turner 151 yds

Week 9 -- DeAngelo 149 yds

Week 10 -- SJax 131 yds

Week 11 -- Graham 31 yds

Now, as for the passing game, New Orleans has allowed 2 passing TDs in only 3 games this year.

-- Week 2 against Kolb

-- Week 6 against the Giants where D. Carr got a late garbage time TD

-- Week 10 against Bulger (Greer out and Porter hurt).

Other than that, they've only allowed 1 passing TD in 2 games and ZERO passing TDs in 5 games (7 of the 10 games).

Only 3 WR's have gone for over 100 yds.

-- Week 2 -- DeSean Jackson with 101 yds (71 yds on one passing play)

-- Week 6 -- Hakeem Nicks with 114 yds almost exclusively in garbage time

-- Week 8 -- Roddy White with 108 yds.

Overall, as a pass defense, NO has been very solid. Only 4 teams have allowed fewer than the 9 passing TDs given up by the Saints (Buffalo, Oakland, Indy, NYJ). Much like Indy, they have a bend don't break pass defense as both are average in passing yds allowed (15th and 17th). And, those #'s are considering that most teams are having to throw a lot to try and catch up.

As a rush defense, looking above, it's somewhat apparent that the loss of Sedrick Ellis and Clancy were huge. Unfortunately, Clancy won't be back but Ellis will be. I know that they also faced better RBs in 3 of those 4 weeks, but it's not as if those other guys are completely slouches, none of which topped 80 yds against the Saints.

Factor in the INTs and sacks that this defense is generating and they are FAR from a poor defense. Not healthy? Sure. Not good as in previous years? Not even close. Greer's back. Sharper's back. Ellis is back. Porter will be back.

This is not the 2000 Baltimore Ravens. But they don't have to be. More importantly, this is not the New Orleans Saints defense of 2008 and before. Those of you saying their defense isn't good at all really haven't watched them play or are aware of the injuries they have sustained. The fact that they are still undefeated despite these injuries is amazing. Yet people want to knock them down because they've had some "close" games lately (coinciding with injuries). Of course, they've actually won 9 of their 10 games by 8 points or more. Sounds good to me.

 

[Clifton]

NE had Indy beaten @ Indy if not for some awful calls by BB. He won't do that again. NoLa has yet to get beat

One = some?Please - Indy won that game despite playing horribly through the third quarter. But then were able to drive for 3 TDs in the 4th quarter, NE couldn't stop them.

If you want to play the "if not" game - NE wouldn't have been able to stop Manning if not for two terribly thrown balls by Manning. The score would have been 49 to 34 if not for two picks by Manning that would have ended up as TDs. It could go on and on.

As far as NoLa has yet to get beat? The Colts have yet to get beat, no mater how you spin it. And if you want to say the Colts came close to losing, so did NoLa. Against the Stl Lambs, NO was losing until about 4 minutes left in the game, and they scored, but then would have lost on the last play had Bulger not thrown an incompletion. Again, you can play the what if game all you want. Bottom line, Colts and Saints are both undefeated.

The Colts won, fair and square, but the Pats didn't lose because of that "call". They lost because Maroney couldn't hold onto the ball on the way into the end zone, or because Brady threw a pick, again, in the end zone. Yes, the Colts won, but the Patriots pretty much had their way with them the entire game, and as a Pats fan, I do not fear going back to Indy for the championship game. I don't fear Indy one bit. We'll see how they do Monday night against NO, because they will be facing either NO or the Vikings in the Super Bowl.

You mean the second or third quarter?End of 1st quarter: 7-7 (7-7 scored)

End of 2nd quarter: 24-14 (17-7 scored)

End of 3rd quarter: 24-14 (0-0 scored)

End of 4th quarter: 34-35 (10-21 scored)

As far as I can tell, the Pats got a lead in the second, which allowed them to play against the pass only in the third, and that caused problems for the Colts. However, in the 4th the Colts came back. I only saw the 4th quarter of the game, was working late on a project. But everyone I spoke to said the Pats seemed to have the Colts number in the third. While I watched in the 4th, the Colts seemed to be able to do anything they wanted against NE.

I have no problem with Pats fans not fearing Indy. Even with 9 seconds left on the clock in that game, I didn't believe the Colts had won it. As far as I'm concerned, if you've got Randy Moss on your team, any QB can heave it down the field, and Moss can make a play. So I didn't think it was over.

But here's the truth: While Pats fans may not fear Indy, Belichick does. He didn't want Peyton to touch the ball again, which is why he went for it on the 4th down.

Maybe if you didn't watch the game you shouldn't be commenting about how it unfolded. Colts won.....yes. Pats were manhandling them for most of the game. They were making them Colts look real bad. I almost stopped watching in the 4th. Peyton looked flustered all game. Colts have had 2-3 skin of their teeth wins this year.

 

[switz]

As far as NoLa has yet to get beat? The Colts have yet to get beat, no mater how you spin it. And if you want to say the Colts came close to losing, so did NoLa. Against the Stl Lambs, NO was losing until about 4 minutes left in the game, and they scored, but then would have lost on the last play had Bulger not thrown an incompletion. Again, you can play the what if game all you want. Bottom line, Colts and Saints are both undefeated.

Uh, what? The Saints were NOT losing to the Rams at ANY point in that game. The Rams NEVER had the lead. I love it when you lie about stuff to try and make a point.

I wasn't lying to make a point. I thought the Saints were down 23-21 when Meachem scored. I didn't look at the box score when I posted, I was going by memory. I made a mistake, heaven forbid. It still ended up a game they could have lost on the last play.

I agree, not as close a some of the Colts games, but my point was that both are still undefeated, not matter how you spin it.

 

[Knobs]

Saints have had a lot of injuries as of late...but I'm still picking them.

And as sluggish as the Steelers have looked, if they make the playoffs I'm not picking against the defending champs. Polomalu is a key piece and Big Ben is nearly as good as Brady/Peyton.

Saints/Steelers. Even though I'm aware teams rarely make it in back to back Super Bowls.

 

[switz]

Maybe if you didn't watch the game you shouldn't be commenting about how it unfolded. Colts won.....yes. Pats were manhandling them for most of the game. They were making them Colts look real bad. I almost stopped watching in the 4th. Peyton looked flustered all game.

Colts have had 2-3 skin of their teeth wins this year.

Peyton didn't look flustered at all in the 4th quarter.Good teams win, period.

 

[dansav]

Week #12 Monday Night Game

that will be your superbowl matchup

 

[Chaka]

Going with NE/Min right now.

Indy is the team to beat in the AFC, but their lack of a running game will hurt them come January, even playing at home in the dome. I still think the Patriots have yet to play their best ball.

I can't believe I am picking a Brad Childress-coached team to make it, but they are rock solid everywhere, and the Saints are showing a lot more cracks than the Vikings are.

You're mistaking cracks with injuries. How many teams can win without their starting DTs, starting CBs, All-Pro LT, and their returning leader in receiving? Throw in the fact each of the 3 RBs has missed time, and the SLB missed 3 games and the FB is on IR, it's amazing they are undefeated. Healthy, no one could stay close. Now they are still winning despite terrible injuries. All but Clancy and Evans will be back for the playoffs.

PS: the Saints running game is much better than the Vikes, don't let pretty names cloud your judgement.

I agree that the Saints are better but that part is laughable.

Lance Moore?

Nice player but an insignificant, and easily replaceable, cog in the New Orleans offense.

 

[Doug B]

Everyone is overlooking Arizona again. They could end up the number 2 seed.

... could, yes. But they need a team in front of them to melt down badly. Cardinals are two games back of the #2 seed with six to play. Crazier things have happened, for sure.

 

[gianmarco]

--New Orleans smallest margin of victory is 5 pts. They've won 9 out of their 10 games by 8 pts or more. That 5 pt win was played away.

--Minnesota has 2 wins by 3 pts or less. They also have a loss. Both of those 3 pt wins were at home.

--Indy has 6 games decided by 4 pts or less. 4 of those 6 games were played at home.

Despite that, New Orleans is the team being described as the "one and done" team by some. At least Indy has faced better quality opponents. The Vikings have actually had an easier schedule than the Saints as their 9 wins came against teams with a combined 30 wins.

 

[Doug B]

For those of you saying the NO defense can't stop anyone:

As pointed out above, NO lost Sedrick Ellis in Week 8. NO lost Kendrick Clancy in week 9. For those not familiar with the Saints, those were the starting DT's.

In week 10, NO lost Greer and Sharper. In week 11, they lost Tracy Porter. For those not familiar with the Saints, those were the starting CB's and their starting FS.

That's essentially HALF of their starting defense (5 of 11 starters) over the last 4 weeks.

Starting LB Scott Fujita came back against the Rams, but he was gone for a few of those weeks, too.EDIT: little noticed by non-Saints fans ... but FB Heath Evans loss has been felt, too.

 

[switz]

--New Orleans smallest margin of victory is 5 pts. They've won 9 out of their 10 games by 8 pts or more. That 5 pt win was played away.--Minnesota has 2 wins by 3 pts or less. They also have a loss. Both of those 3 pt wins were at home.--Indy has 6 games decided by 4 pts or less. 4 of those 6 games were played at home.Despite that, New Orleans is the team being described as the "one and done" team by some. At least Indy has faced better quality opponents. The Vikings have actually had an easier schedule than the Saints as their 9 wins came against teams with a combined 30 wins.

I don't see why ppl pick NO as one and done. :(I picked Indy vs. NO.

 

[ATC1]

Going with NE/Min right now.

Indy is the team to beat in the AFC, but their lack of a running game will hurt them come January, even playing at home in the dome. I still think the Patriots have yet to play their best ball.

I can't believe I am picking a Brad Childress-coached team to make it, but they are rock solid everywhere, and the Saints are showing a lot more cracks than the Vikings are.

You're mistaking cracks with injuries. How many teams can win without their starting DTs, starting CBs, All-Pro LT, and their returning leader in receiving? Throw in the fact each of the 3 RBs has missed time, and the SLB missed 3 games and the FB is on IR, it's amazing they are undefeated. Healthy, no one could stay close. Now they are still winning despite terrible injuries. All but Clancy and Evans will be back for the playoffs.

PS: the Saints running game is much better than the Vikes, don't let pretty names cloud your judgement.

I agree that the Saints are better but that part is laughable.

Lance Moore?

Nice player but an insignificant, and easily replaceable, cog in the New Orleans offense.

ok, but laughable in the argument? Lance Moore = Wes Welker Eventhough Meachum has filled in nice he is still more of a homerun threat than a find the hole in the defense, get the tough yards in a 3rd down type of player.

 

[Doug B]

Saints have had a lot of injuries as of late...but I'm still picking them.

So far, the Saints have had three main guys go on IR during the season -- starting DT Kendrick Clancy, starting FB Heath Evans, and CB Leigh Torrance. That's in order of importance to the Saints' fortunes.There are several other injuries, but everyone else is expected back at some point soon. DT Sedrick Ellis was Questionable going into the TB game .... it's possible he was being saved for the Patriots. The return of CB Jabari Greer is much anticipated -- not sure if he'll be back for MNF or not.

 

[Doug B]

Lance Moore = Wes Welker Eventhough Meachum has filled in nice he is still more of a homerun threat than a find the hole in the defense, get the tough yards in a 3rd down type of player.

Lance Moore's schematic replacement has been reserve TE David Thomas. Thomas has shown to be nice value after being acquired in pre-season from the Pats for a 2011 7th-rounder. The fact that he went through trainig camp with the Patriots is a small plus this week.

 

[Tau837]

For those of you saying the NO defense can't stop anyone:

As pointed out above, NO lost Sedrick Ellis in Week 8. NO lost Kendrick Clancy in week 9. For those not familiar with the Saints, those were the starting DT's.

In week 10, NO lost Greer and Sharper. In week 11, they lost Tracy Porter. For those not familiar with the Saints, those were the starting CB's and their starting FS.

That's essentially HALF of their starting defense (5 of 11 starters) over the last 4 weeks.

So, through week 7, the defense was mostly healthy. In that time, here were the leading rushers:

Week 1 -- Kevin Smith - 20 yds

Week 2 -- Westbrook - 52 yds

Week 3 -- Fred Jackson - 71 yds

Week 4 -- T. Jones - 48 yds

Week 6 -- A. Bradshaw - 48 yds

Week 7 -- Ricky Williams 80 yds

And then (of course, with Ellis then Clancy out):

Week 8 -- Turner 151 yds

Week 9 -- DeAngelo 149 yds

Week 10 -- SJax 131 yds

Week 11 -- Graham 31 yds

Now, as for the passing game, New Orleans has allowed 2 passing TDs in only 3 games this year.

-- Week 2 against Kolb

-- Week 6 against the Giants where D. Carr got a late garbage time TD

-- Week 10 against Bulger (Greer out and Porter hurt).

Other than that, they've only allowed 1 passing TD in 2 games and ZERO passing TDs in 5 games (7 of the 10 games).

Only 3 WR's have gone for over 100 yds.

-- Week 2 -- DeSean Jackson with 101 yds (71 yds on one passing play)

-- Week 6 -- Hakeem Nicks with 114 yds almost exclusively in garbage time

-- Week 8 -- Roddy White with 108 yds.

Overall, as a pass defense, NO has been very solid. Only 4 teams have allowed fewer than the 9 passing TDs given up by the Saints (Buffalo, Oakland, Indy, NYJ). Much like Indy, they have a bend don't break pass defense as both are average in passing yds allowed (15th and 17th). And, those #'s are considering that most teams are having to throw a lot to try and catch up.

As a rush defense, looking above, it's somewhat apparent that the loss of Sedrick Ellis and Clancy were huge. Unfortunately, Clancy won't be back but Ellis will be. I know that they also faced better RBs in 3 of those 4 weeks, but it's not as if those other guys are completely slouches, none of which topped 80 yds against the Saints.

Factor in the INTs and sacks that this defense is generating and they are FAR from a poor defense. Not healthy? Sure. Not good as in previous years? Not even close. Greer's back. Sharper's back. Ellis is back. Porter will be back.

This is not the 2000 Baltimore Ravens. But they don't have to be. More importantly, this is not the New Orleans Saints defense of 2008 and before. Those of you saying their defense isn't good at all really haven't watched them play or are aware of the injuries they have sustained. The fact that they are still undefeated despite these injuries is amazing. Yet people want to knock them down because they've had some "close" games lately (coinciding with injuries). Of course, they've actually won 9 of their 10 games by 8 points or more. Sounds good to me.

I must have missed where people were saying the Saints defense can't stop anyone. I said I think the Vikings defense is better, which is obviously not the same thing.The Saints are 10-0, but we really don't know how good they are or how good their defense is. The combined record of their 10 opponents so far is 37-63, with only 2 games against teams who currently have winning records (and both of them are 6-4). And over the last 4 weeks where you cited the injuries as being the worst, the Saints played 2 teams which are currently 5-5 at home and two teams which are currently 1-9 on the road. Good timing on those injuries.

Without delving into the numbers, it is reasonable to think either those 10 teams' offenses were not particularly strong... or their defenses were not particularly strong, putting those offenses into a hole and forcing them into a one dimensional offense... or both.

Of course, the combined record of the Vikings' 10 opponents is similar at 36-64, so similar things can be said of them. The combined record of the Colts' 10 opponents is 47-53.

 

[gianmarco]

I must have missed where people were saying the Saints defense can't stop anyone. I said I think the Vikings defense is better, which is obviously not the same thing.

only this year the Saints look like Minnesota that year, great O, avg IMO D that can be taken advantage of

Saints will be one-n-done..get the bye,lose their first playoff game, there's one team like that, every year ( see Tenn last season) Saints have no defense.

Here's a couple in this thread. Check out a few of the NO game threads for many others.

 

[Ghost Rider]

In all fairness, the Saints are 17th in total defense, which is decidedly average (yes, I know some injuries have hurt them at times).

On the flip side, they are first in the NFL with 29 takeaways.

In other words, you can move the ball on the Saints defense, but they are excellent at forcing turnovers, and they turn many of those turnovers into points. To beat the Saints, you must protect the ball. It really is that simple (obviously not simple to do).

 

[gianmarco]

Couple others, btw:

If the last 3-4 weeks has shown us anything, it's that they Saints D can't stop ANYONE.

If the last 3-4 weeks has shown us anything, it's that they Saints D can't stop ANYONE.

I pointed this out after the Miami game and got roasted for it. This is an excellent team, but it won't be going far in the playoffs.

 

[PatsFanCT]

The Saints are for real, no doubt, and have a legitimate shot at hoisting the Lombardi, but please stop with the injury report. Injuries are part of the game, every team has them. The Saints aren't special because they are winning games with key players on the bench.

 

[Doug B]

The Saints are for real, no doubt, and have a legitimate shot at hoisting the Lombardi, but please stop with the injury report. Injuries are part of the game, every team has them. The Saints aren't special because they are winning games with key players on the bench.

I'm interested in other teams' injury reports, when teams are getting people back, etc. Especially going into the playoffs.

 

[ATC1]

The Saints are for real, no doubt, and have a legitimate shot at hoisting the Lombardi, but please stop with the injury report. Injuries are part of the game, every team has them. The Saints aren't special because they are winning games with key players on the bench.

No, but they are losing respect of the board as true SB contenders because key people are missing games. Fans pull the injury card to explain that the Saints are not simply falling apart on defense because they are returning as the Aints. Having faith that you can rest your starters and still pull off the W is a larger indication that the team is in the right direction for the long haul.

 

[Doug B]

No, but they are losing respect of the board as true SB contenders because key people are missing games.

Good -- front-runners and fan faves have bigger targets on their backs.

 

[Anarchy99]

Here were the records after 10 games and the rest of the way for recent SB participants . . .

2008 PIT (7-3, 5-1), ARI (7-3, 2-4)

2007 NYG (7-3, 3-3), NEP (10-0, 6-0)

2006 IND (9-1, 3-3), CHI (9-1, 4-2)

2005 PIT (7-3, 4-2), SEA (8-2, 5-1)

2004 NEP (9-1, 5-1), PHI (9-1, 4-2)

2003 NEP (8-2, 6-0), CAR (8-2, 3-3)

2002 TBB (8-2. 4-2), OAK (6-4, 5-1)

2001 NEP (5-5, 6-0), STL (8-2, 5-1)

2000 BAL (6-4, 6-0), NYG (7-3, 5-1)

1999 STL (8-2, 5-1), TEN (8-2, 5-1)

Interesting that if not for a game in which the Patriots handed the Dolphins two TD and a gift victory in 2004, NE would have been 24-0 down the stretch to get to their 4 SB appearances.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

NFC looks like it will be the Vikes or the Saints. I expect these two teams to meet in the NFC title game and I have no clue who will prevail. Both teams look scary. With a gun to my head I'd say Minnesota simply because they have so many factors working in their favor: veteran QB who has been there before, dominant running game, playmaking defense, and a diverse passing game with several guys who can hurt you. The Saints are a little more one-dimensional.

Funny that you list this as a Viking strength, yet the Saints are better in all of these categories.

Not sure about this statement.Are the Saints a better playmaking defense? They have 24 sacks, 20 interceptions, 11 forced fumbles, and 12 defensive fumble recoveries. The Vikings have 34 sacks, 7 interceptions, 16 forced fumbles, and 9 defensive fumble recoveries. So the Saints have made more big plays to date... but I suspect a lot of those 20 interceptions have been because teams are forced into passing situations when down big to the Saints... something I doubt will happen to Minnesota if they face each other in the playoffs. I suppose you said the Saints are better because of the word playmaking, but the Vikings have a better defense IMO, having allowed fewer yards and fewer points, and they should have Winfield back by the playoffs.

If anything the Saints big plays are down lately with all the injuries to their secondary. With their normal starters in there, particularly Sharper, I don't think it's even close as to which is more of a playmaking defense. Jared Allen picking up some sacks is nice, but the Saints have won games off of huge defensive touchdowns made by their defense.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Here were the records after 10 games and the rest of the way for recent SB participants . . .2008 PIT (7-3, 5-1), ARI (7-3, 2-4)2007 NYG (7-3, 3-3), NEP (10-0, 6-0)2006 IND (9-1, 3-3), CHI (9-1, 4-2)2005 PIT (7-3, 4-2), SEA (8-2, 5-1)2004 NEP (9-1, 5-1), PHI (9-1, 4-2)2003 NEP (8-2, 6-0), CAR (8-2, 3-3)2002 TBB (8-2. 4-2), OAK (6-4, 5-1)2001 NEP (5-5, 6-0), STL (8-2, 5-1)2000 BAL (6-4, 6-0), NYG (7-3, 5-1)1999 STL (8-2, 5-1), TEN (8-2, 5-1)Interesting that if not for a game in which the Patriots handed the Dolphins two TD and a gift victory in 2004, NE would have been 24-0 down the stretch to get to their 4 SB appearances.

It's also interesting the half the super bowl teams the last three years finished .500 or worse down the stretch heading into the playoffs, especially with all the talk of people riding hot streaks through the playoffs.

 

[Tau837]

NFC looks like it will be the Vikes or the Saints. I expect these two teams to meet in the NFC title game and I have no clue who will prevail. Both teams look scary. With a gun to my head I'd say Minnesota simply because they have so many factors working in their favor: veteran QB who has been there before, dominant running game, playmaking defense, and a diverse passing game with several guys who can hurt you. The Saints are a little more one-dimensional.

Funny that you list this as a Viking strength, yet the Saints are better in all of these categories.

Not sure about this statement.Are the Saints a better playmaking defense? They have 24 sacks, 20 interceptions, 11 forced fumbles, and 12 defensive fumble recoveries. The Vikings have 34 sacks, 7 interceptions, 16 forced fumbles, and 9 defensive fumble recoveries. So the Saints have made more big plays to date... but I suspect a lot of those 20 interceptions have been because teams are forced into passing situations when down big to the Saints... something I doubt will happen to Minnesota if they face each other in the playoffs. I suppose you said the Saints are better because of the word playmaking, but the Vikings have a better defense IMO, having allowed fewer yards and fewer points, and they should have Winfield back by the playoffs.

If anything the Saints big plays are down lately with all the injuries to their secondary. With their normal starters in there, particularly Sharper, I don't think it's even close as to which is more of a playmaking defense. Jared Allen picking up some sacks is nice, but the Saints have won games off of huge defensive touchdowns made by their defense.

Yes... as I said in my post, the Saints are a better playmaking defense, and the Vikings are a better defense. IMO it is unlikely that the Saints will continue to average getting almost 3 turnovers per game. I certainly don't think they could count on that if they play the Vikings in the playoffs.And their playmaking has not been down due to injuries. In their first 5 games, the Saints defense got 12 sacks and 15 turnovers; in their last 5 games, the Saints defense got 12 sacks and 14 turnovers.

 

[purestrength]

--New Orleans smallest margin of victory is 5 pts. They've won 9 out of their 10 games by 8 pts or more. That 5 pt win was played away.--Minnesota has 2 wins by 3 pts or less. They also have a loss. Both of those 3 pt wins were at home.--Indy has 6 games decided by 4 pts or less. 4 of those 6 games were played at home.Despite that, New Orleans is the team being described as the "one and done" team by some. At least Indy has faced better quality opponents. The Vikings have actually had an easier schedule than the Saints as their 9 wins came against teams with a combined 30 wins.

I don't see why ppl pick NO as one and done. I picked Indy vs. NO.

Ditto for me. I just hope the Colts don't lose to San Diego in the playoffs again. It can't happen three years in a row, can it?

 

[Doug B]

And their playmaking has not been down due to injuries. In their first 5 games, the Saints defense got 12 sacks and 15 turnovers; in their last 5 games, the Saints defense got 12 sacks and 14 turnovers.

And frankly, this has saved the Saints' skins over the past few weeks.

What the injuries have done is make opponents much more effective between the 20s, especially in the run game. The Saints got deep red-zone INTs against both Atlanta and St. Louis -- had those drives been converted into TDs, the Saints would've been in much greater danger of losing.

 

[Titus Pullo]

nfc rep, Vikings/Saints or the field?

* New Orleans Saints 2.25

* Minnesota Vikings 3.50

* Arizona Cardinals 9.00

* Dallas Cowboys 10.00

* Philadelphia Eagles 10.00

* New York Giants 13.00

* Green Bay Packers 17.00

* Atlanta Falcons 51.00

* San Francisco 49ers 101.00

* Carolina Panthers 151.00

* Chicago Bears 151.00

* Seattle Seahawks 251.00

 

[Chaka]

Lance Moore = Wes Welker

That's just crazy talk.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

MIN & TEN