NFL Prediction Time!

Have not had much NFL talk. Training camps are just around the corner, so lets get some early prediction chatter going...

NFC

East
1- Eagles. I think their off-season loses drag down their gains. Still the best of their division, but won't get back to the NFC Championship.
2- Redskins. The defensive line flat-out sucks and will limit them, but Gibbs will get the offense humming enough to squeek into a WC berth.
3- Cowboys. Parcells is a great coach and will get the most out of the team, but the bottom line is that their just isn't a whole lot of talent to work with on either side of the ball. Smoke and Mirrors can only get you so far.
4- Giants. Rookie QB and bad lines don't mix. Add in some bruised egos by vets and you have a potent mixture for failure.

North
1- Vikings. As good of an off-season as any team in the league. Made great strides shoring up a so-so defense and made a potent offense downright scary with the return of Bennett and additions of Wiggins and Robinson.
2- Packers*. Had the division crown for only a single play last year, but it was the one that mattered most. Won't give up without a fight, but didn't keep up with an improving division. If they don't hold off the Vikes, should be a favorite for a Wild Card berth.
3- Lions. Improving quickly, but still have a ways to go. Tons of youth at key positions that will need time to acclimate.
4- Bears. Headed in the right direction, but will take 2 steps back before taking 3 steps forward. Woefully inexperienced coaching staff, new offense, new defense and a glut of new starters will cause considerable growing pains.

South
1- Panthers. Played their cards right last year, but overachieved some. Rebuilding the line for a run-based team is a head scratcher that doesn't bode well.
2- Tampa Bay. Without a doubt, this is now Gruden's team. An old team without one discernable position of strength left. Gruden is a great coach, but his ego may be getting the better of him.
3- Atlanta. All aboard the Vick-hype express!! Destination: disappointment. Why on earth anybody would try to shoehorn Vick into a West-Cost-Offense (a premium on timing and accuracy, Vick's weakest attributes) is beyond me.
4- New Orleans. By all accounts, they should make the play-offs. Saints just routinely end up less than the sum of their parts. Good 'stats', bad 'team'.

West
1- Seattle. A team of contrasts. Awesome at home, terrible on the road. Great in the secondary, terrible on the line. Have an explosive offense that will off-set a marginal defense (well, half is so-so and the other half great) to win their division.
2- St. Louis. Offense should be strong, even with the erratic Bulger in charge. However, defense looks downright horrid. If Little does go (suspension and/or jail), then this DL is attrocious. Even if he stays, it is still poor. If they had a savvy coach that could hide weaknesses, they could get by. They have Martz.
3- Arizona. Cards have too many holes to fix overnight, and Green is not capable of a Parcells-like fix.
4- San Fran. Even if the defense proves solid, no offense in the NFL is more challanged than the Niners. Not even Williams proved able to carry a team all by himself. Barlow is no Williams.

AFC
East
1- Patriots. Gotta show love for the champs. Tough to repeat, but tough to not give them their due.
2- Jets*. I think they are a sleeper this year. They have invested a ton in their defensive line, if they can perform up to par it will help shield a so-so secondary. Pennington is back and will have more to work with as well. My darkhorse pick for a Wild Card berth.
3- Miami. Took a step back. Line is in disarray, Ogunleye's situation looks ugly, Boston is a total headcase and Feely is no savior.
4- Bills. Tough to be too optimistic with a rookie head coach. Could surprise if the offense steps up and defense maintains a high level of performance. Need to show a dramatic improvement in pass blocking.

North
1- Ravens. Virtually win by default. Defense is top-notch as is the running game. Passing game flat-out blows. Boller looks more athlete than QB and has virtually nothing to work with (Heap is it).
2- Steelers. I don't think they were as bad as they seemed last year, injuries across the o-line decimated them. Will still struggle to reach .500, but that may be good enough to win the division.
3- Bengals. The Palmer era begins and with it come the growing pains of a young QB. Will be hard pressed to match last year's record.
4- Browns. Inept, Cleveland be thy name. Questions abound all over the place, just easier to list off their strengths. ______ Here endeth the reading.

South
1- Indy. Took some $$ hits keeping Manning, but still didn't lose as much as their closest rival. Solid team, but not a dominate one.
2- Tennessee. The window to the Super Bowl is closing fast. If it hasn't closed already. They now live and die by the oft-injured arm of McNair. The defense will miss the double-team that Kearse draws.
3- Houston. Could/should be a surprise team this year. Offense has the ingredients to get the job done and the defense brought in some key players. May even make a run at the division title.
4- Jacksonville. Improving fast, still a work in progress. Del Rio and Leftwich are both learning on the job.

West
1- Denver. Tough call. Lost Portis, but can get by with a Runningback-by-committee. Lost Sharpe, but Plummer will have another year in the system. Lost McCaffrey, but he was marginal and Lelie should improve. Lost Mobley, but drafted Williams. Lost Gold, but added Bailey. Lost Berry, but added Lynch. In all, I give the benefit of the doubt to Shanahan and think he gets them the division.
2- KC*. Overachieved last year and were helped by a soft schedule. Not as fortunate this time. Defense remains an eyesore and the offense took a hit with Tait's departure.
3- Oakland. Made a lot of noise, but not as much improvement. Washington and Sapp have nothing to play for but paychecks at this point. They do not off-set the talent that was lost. Offense wants to go to a running attach, but lack the RBs to do it. I expect them to be better than last year, but not significantly so. 8-8 looks like their ceiling to me.
4- San Diego. If it was not for Tomlinson, this team would struggle to cross the 50-yard line all year on their way to a 0-16 season. They have maybe a half dozen (AT MOST) guys that would be sure to start on any other team. Heck, they have some starters that might not make other team's rosters.

Have not had much NFL talk. Training camps are just around the corner, so lets get some early prediction chatter going...

NFC

East
3- Cowboys. Parcells is a great coach and will get the most out of the team, but the bottom line is that their just isn't a whole lot of talent to work with on either side of the ball. Smoke and Mirrors can only get you so far.

*cough*#1 defense*cough*....they have plenty of talent on both sides of the ball. You obviously dont know who Roy Williams, Darren Woodson, Terence Newman, La'Roi Glover, Dat Ngyun(sp?), Dexter Coakley, Greg Ellis just to name a few on the defensive side of the ball.

It's July 7th, no eduicated predictions can happen for at least a month. there are still cuts and such to be made before training camps begin

The Detroit Lions will make the playoffs. And win one game.

Seahawks > playoffs > super bowl bound

:handclap: go hawks :handclap:

*cough*#1 defense*cough*....they have plenty of talent on both sides of the ball. You obviously dont know who Roy Williams, Darren Woodson, Terence Newman, La'Roi Glover, Dat Ngyun(sp?), Dexter Coakley, Greg Ellis just to name a few on the defensive side of the ball.

I know exactly who they are. I don't see Ngyun or Ellis notable players though. Good ones, just not gamebreakers. Glover, Woodson and Coakley have already seen their best days as well. You didn't mention Wiley, but he has not had a quality season in 2 years, so maybe it is for good reason.

I think the #1 ranking is smoke and mirrors. The defensive line offers a marginal pass rush and isn't the big-bodied run stuffer type either.

The LBs are good. Not exceptional, but good.

CBs look weak. Newman is great on one half the field, but the other half and nickel packages look weak. Williams and Woodson are as good of a safety combination as you can find, but forcing them to sit back and help in coverage doesn't play to theri strength.

IMO, the defense wasn't as good as it's ranking and didn't get any better in the off-season.

Now, all that said, defense is still well ahead of the offense. Few teams are as bad at QB as the Cowboys. They have no stand-out receivers. The run game is banking it's hopes on a 2nd round rookie to carry the load. Heck, he will arguably be their most dangerous offensive player. That is a sub-par unit.

NFC East

1. Eagles
2. Redskins
3. Cowboys
4. Giants

NFC Central

1. Vikings
2. Packers
3. Lions
4. Bears

NFC South

1. Panthers
2. Falcons
3. Bucs
4. Saints

NFC West

1. Seahawks
2. Rams
3. Cards
4. 49'ers

AFC East

1. Pats
2. Jets
3. Dolphins
4. Bills

AFC Central

1. Ravens
2. Bengals
3. Steelers
4. Browns

AFC South

1. Colts
2. Titans
3. Houston
4. Jacksonville

AFC West

1. Chiefs
2. Raiders
3. Broncos
4. Chargers



Teams in bold will make the playoffs.

I know exactly who they are. I don't see Ngyun or Ellis notable players though. Good ones, just not gamebreakers. Glover, Woodson and Coakley have already seen their best days as well. You didn't mention Wiley, but he has not had a quality season in 2 years, so maybe it is for good reason.

I think the #1 ranking is smoke and mirrors. The defensive line offers a marginal pass rush and isn't the big-bodied run stuffer type either.

The LBs are good. Not exceptional, but good.

CBs look weak. Newman is great on one half the field, but the other half and nickel packages look weak. Williams and Woodson are as good of a safety combination as you can find, but forcing them to sit back and help in coverage doesn't play to theri strength.

IMO, the defense wasn't as good as it's ranking and didn't get any better in the off-season.

Now, all that said, defense is still well ahead of the offense. Few teams are as bad at QB as the Cowboys. They have no stand-out receivers. The run game is banking it's hopes on a 2nd round rookie to carry the load. Heck, he will arguably be their most dangerous offensive player. That is a sub-par unit.

Im not even gonna comment about the offense..I know its probably bottom-10 in the league. But about the defense...how many 'notable' players did the Patriots have on defense last year? You dont have to have a bunch of superstars to be a great defense. And Williams/Woodson didnt just sit back in coverage last year either. "The defensive line offers a marginal pass rush and isn't the big-bodied run stuffer type either"...they were like that last year, didnt seem to hurt them. Im not sure how you can say a #1 ranking on defense can be smoke and mirrors.....they dont have very many stars, but they play great as a unit....kind of like what Calgary did to get to the Finals this year. But I suppose you said the same thing about the Rams offense of a few years ago.

how many 'notable' players did the Patriots have on defense last year?


Two current Pro Bowlers in Ty Law and Richard Seymour and a number of former Pro Bowlers in Ted Johnson (who played sparingly due to injuries), Willie McGinest (who was very good when called upon), Ted Washington (who has moved on to LA) and Rodney Harrison.

Really, they had a lot of talent on D last year ... but a lot of blue collar players that made large contributions (Roman Phifer, Tedy Bruschi, Tyrone Poole, Jarvis Green, etc).


You dont have to have a bunch of superstars to be a great defense.

Agreed. It's all about the system. Doesn't hurt to have talent, though ;)

Im not even gonna comment about the offense..I know its probably bottom-10 in the league. But about the defense...how many 'notable' players did the Patriots have on defense last year? You dont have to have a bunch of superstars to be a great defense. And Williams/Woodson didnt just sit back in coverage last year either. "The defensive line offers a marginal pass rush and isn't the big-bodied run stuffer type either"...they were like that last year, didnt seem to hurt them. Im not sure how you can say a #1 ranking on defense can be smoke and mirrors.....they dont have very many stars, but they play great as a unit....kind of like what Calgary did to get to the Finals this year. But I suppose you said the same thing about the Rams offense of a few years ago.

New England has several notable top-end players. Seymour is, undeniably, the best 3-4 end in the league. Arguably the most complete defensive linemen overall. Law is one of the top-5 CBs in the league. Harrison is a top-5 strong safety. Washington one of the best run-stuffing tackles in the game. 4 of the starting 11 represent some of the best in the league at the respective positions. The difference is that NE also didn't have any areas of concern. Their weakest areas were still solid. LB core didn't have any stand-outs, but was a quality and deep unit. They had one starting position with a ?? by it, and the rookie Wilson came through strong. Combine a few great players with several more solid ones, toss in great coaching and that is how you got the best defense in the league (points-wise) by a wide margin. New England has one of the most talented defenses in the league, the 'no name' theory tossed around by the media is a quickly dispelled myth.

Dallas is different. Their pass rush was one of the worst in the league. I don't think Wiley is going to change that much. With Ross and Edwards gone, their coverage in the secondary is going to suffer. Williams and Woodson will either have to drop back into coverage more as a result, or have a weak area on the field. Doesn't matter how talented the young Newman is if teams keep throwing away from him. Cowboys have more players nearing the end (Wiley, Woodson, Glover, Coakley) than getting better (Williams, Newman).

I do think it was smoke and mirrors. Dallas had an exceptional defense last year. Tops in yardage allowed, 2nd in points allowed. But how? They didn't create too many turn-overs (middle of the pack), they didn't generate many sacks and they are not blessed with overwhelming talent. What is left? Smoke and mirrors, the defense wasn't as dominant as their ranking. Only three defenses spent less time on the field than the Cowboys. I think they will be hard pressed to repeat that success. They won't drop off the map (remaining in the top-10 is likely), but I don't think their defense will be able to carry their offense again.

What does the Rams offense have to do with this anyway? Are you trying to say that it didn't have top-end players when it was dominant? Faulk, Warner (in that system), Pace, Bruce and Holt would indicate otherwise.

New England has several notable top-end players. Seymour is, undeniably, the best 3-4 end in the league. Arguably the most complete defensive linemen overall. Law is one of the top-5 CBs in the league. Harrison is a top-5 strong safety. Washington one of the best run-stuffing tackles in the game. 4 of the starting 11 represent some of the best in the league at the respective positions. The difference is that NE also didn't have any areas of concern. Their weakest areas were still solid. LB core didn't have any stand-outs, but was a quality and deep unit. They had one starting position with a ?? by it, and the rookie Wilson came through strong. Combine a few great players with several more solid ones, toss in great coaching and that is how you got the best defense in the league (points-wise) by a wide margin. New England has one of the most talented defenses in the league, the 'no name' theory tossed around by the media is a quickly dispelled myth.
Dallas is different. Their pass rush was one of the worst in the league. I don't think Wiley is going to change that much. With Ross and Edwards gone, their coverage in the secondary is going to suffer. Williams and Woodson will either have to drop back into coverage more as a result, or have a weak area on the field. Doesn't matter how talented the young Newman is if teams keep throwing away from him. Cowboys have more players nearing the end (Wiley, Woodson, Glover, Coakley) than getting better (Williams, Newman).

I do think it was smoke and mirrors. Dallas had an exceptional defense last year. Tops in yardage allowed, 2nd in points allowed. But how? They didn't create too many turn-overs (middle of the pack), they didn't generate many sacks and they are not blessed with overwhelming talent. What is left? Smoke and mirrors, the defense wasn't as dominant as their ranking. Only three defenses spent less time on the field than the Cowboys. I think they will be hard pressed to repeat that success. They won't drop off the map (remaining in the top-10 is likely), but I don't think their defense will be able to carry their offense again.

What does the Rams offense have to do with this anyway? Are you trying to say that it didn't have top-end players when it was dominant? Faulk, Warner (in that system), Pace, Bruce and Holt would indicate otherwise.

Ross didnt do anything last year...and Edwards wasn't that good while he was here either..not exactly a big loss. As for New England...Im pretty sure the Cowboys would be just as good as them 'points-wise' if we got away with the rediculous amount of holding/interference that NE did...but thats a whole different issue...guess we're just gonna disagree on how good the Cowboys D is :dunno:. So because all they did was limit the number of plays the opposition had the ball, you consider it smoke and mirrors? Sure they dont create turnovers...but they dont have to...they are extremely effective at just limiting how long the other team has the ball, by forcing 3 and outs and such.

As long as the Vikes don't nosedive again, they basically have the division by default, there is no other competition other than the Pack and they're on the way down.

Lions: 6-10, improving, but still a season away from the PO.

Two current Pro Bowlers in Ty Law and Richard Seymour and a number of former Pro Bowlers in Ted Johnson (who played sparingly due to injuries), Willie McGinest (who was very good when called upon), Ted Washington (who has moved on to LA) and Rodney Harrison.

Really, they had a lot of talent on D last year ... but a lot of blue collar players that made large contributions (Roman Phifer, Tedy Bruschi, Tyrone Poole, Jarvis Green, etc).



Agreed. It's all about the system. Doesn't hurt to have talent, though ;)

Plus this season Colvin can be thrown into the hat, Pats are going to be even better this season. :banana:

4- Giants. Rookie QB and bad lines don't mix. Add in some bruised egos by vets and you have a potent mixture for failure.

Manning won't start.....at least not until the 4th quarter of the 1st game of the season in Philly when Warner goes down with his umpteenth concussion.

I don't expect them to contend, but I don't think they'll be a disaster either. General Coughlin has done wonders before....

People are forgetting this is the NFL. On any given season teams go from top to bottom, bottom to top and back up or down again. Some teams are legit because of their past history (Eagles, Patriots, Titans these teams know how to get it done).



John, you're a very very smart man, but your picks are nearly inconceivable, simply because the NFL is inconceivable. Your picks are too good, and that's why they won't happen :D



I reserve my picks until August however, one thing I am certain is that the Saints will shock all the naysayers, they will not be last, while they have been through some adversity the past few years, it is exactly that, in the past, they had some problems with players (Grady Jackson) and players getting in trouble, but as long as there are no distractions, they will do well.

Ross didnt do anything last year...and Edwards wasn't that good while he was here either..not exactly a big loss. As for New England...Im pretty sure the Cowboys would be just as good as them 'points-wise' if we got away with the rediculous amount of holding/interference that NE did...but thats a whole different issue...guess we're just gonna disagree on how good the Cowboys D is :dunno:. So because all they did was limit the number of plays the opposition had the ball, you consider it smoke and mirrors? Sure they dont create turnovers...but they dont have to...they are extremely effective at just limiting how long the other team has the ball, by forcing 3 and outs and such.

The defense that finished #1 last year wasn't much different than the defense than finished 18th the previous year. They have a better scheme, which is huge, but the talent difference between that 18th ranked unit and the one this year isn't that much. While they are better than 18th, I don't think they are #1. Somewhere in the middle, a top-5 to 10 ranking statistically but short on 'plays'. Making those 'plays' is what makes a defense good even when they have to be on the field more often.

Why do I think it was smoke and mirrors? Because the defense didn't get sacks, didn't get TDs, didn't force turn-overs, is weak along the defensive line and short on playmakers overall and yet still managed to rank high. Why? Because they were adept at keeping off the field. Tough to give major props to a defense whose best asset was being off the field. Is their defense good? Yes. Great? No.

Is it as good as NE? Not a chance. Sure, they exploited a lax PI calling, but there is no denying the advantage they had in talent. Cowboy's just don't have the top-end players the Patriots do. If they did, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Edwards, while nothing special, was still a legit starting CB. Something that is not easily replaced, a much bigger loss than you seem to think. This league is short on quality corners. Combine that with a weak pass rush and you have a problem. Potentially a big one.

Manning won't start.....at least not until the 4th quarter of the 1st game of the season in Philly when Warner goes down with his umpteenth concussion.

I don't expect them to contend, but I don't think they'll be a disaster either. General Coughlin has done wonders before....

I think this is a transition year for the Giants. A lot of the 'old guard' do not fit in well with how Coughlin runs the team. I think the Giants will be more competitive (play with more intensity, not cave as easily), but I don't know if that will reflect in an improved record.

Ross didnt do anything last year...and Edwards wasn't that good while he was here either..not exactly a big loss. As for New England...Im pretty sure the Cowboys would be just as good as them 'points-wise' if we got away with the rediculous amount of holding/interference that NE did...but thats a whole different issue...guess we're just gonna disagree on how good the Cowboys D is :dunno:. So because all they did was limit the number of plays the opposition had the ball, you consider it smoke and mirrors? Sure they dont create turnovers...but they dont have to...they are extremely effective at just limiting how long the other team has the ball, by forcing 3 and outs and such.


Look at Dallas' first half of last season:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/teamsched?team=dal&year=2003

There defense looked good because most of the teams they played were so bad (that and the NFC East was weak last year too). I doubt Parcells has as an easy time this year, considering both the Giants and Redskins have real coaches again.

The defense that finished #1 last year wasn't much different than the defense than finished 18th the previous year. They have a better scheme, which is huge, but the talent difference between that 18th ranked unit and the one this year isn't that much. While they are better than 18th, I don't think they are #1. Somewhere in the middle, a top-5 to 10 ranking statistically but short on 'plays'. Making those 'plays' is what makes a defense good even when they have to be on the field more often.

Why do I think it was smoke and mirrors? Because the defense didn't get sacks, didn't get TDs, didn't force turn-overs, is weak along the defensive line and short on playmakers overall and yet still managed to rank high. Why? Because they were adept at keeping off the field. Tough to give major props to a defense whose best asset was being off the field. Is their defense good? Yes. Great? No.

Is it as good as NE? Not a chance. Sure, they exploited a lax PI calling, but there is no denying the advantage they had in talent. Cowboy's just don't have the top-end players the Patriots do. If they did, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Edwards, while nothing special, was still a legit starting CB. Something that is not easily replaced, a much bigger loss than you seem to think. This league is short on quality corners. Combine that with a weak pass rush and you have a problem. Potentially a big one.

The defense that finished #1 was much better than the one that finished #18...Williams had a year of experience, Newman was added, alot of their players got better. And NE did more than just exploit lax PI calling...thats almost all they did everytime I watched one of their games(I have Sunday Ticket, so I saw alot of them)...but as I said before, thats beside the point. And you keep saying weak pass rush....what if Wiley returns to his 15 1/2 sack from from a few years back(or however many he has).....it could happen, just like the the loss of Edwards could 'potentially be a big one'.

People are forgetting this is the NFL. On any given season teams go from top to bottom, bottom to top and back up or down again. Some teams are legit because of their past history (Eagles, Patriots, Titans these teams know how to get it done).

The fun is in picking the ones that do. Sometimes you hit (Panthers, Vikes), sometimes you miss (Giants, Raiders). The NFL is not as big of a crap shoot as people paint it out to be. There will be a surprise team that either exceeds or disappoints, but you find that in every sport.

I very much doubt that too many people pegged a TB-Calgary match-up...

I reserve my picks until August however, one thing I am certain is that the Saints will shock all the naysayers, they will not be last, while they have been through some adversity the past few years, it is exactly that, in the past, they had some problems with players (Grady Jackson) and players getting in trouble, but as long as there are no distractions, they will do well.

I would take that bet. I think the Saints are sorely lacking in leadership. That starts at the head coach and works down from there. Many of those players with distraction problems remain with the team. Plus (I know this was discussed last year), I think Brooks is the modern-day equivalent of Jeff George. A guy who does well statistically, but lacks leadership and doesn't win games. The Anti-Aikmen.

The defense that finished #1 was much better than the one that finished #18...Williams had a year of experience, Newman was added, alot of their players got better.

8 of the 11 starters were the same. Ellis, Ekuban, Glover, Coakley, Woodson, Edwards, Nguyen and Williams was one of the few young players on the rise, he is more than balanced out by older ones in decline. Newman was an upgrade on Ross, but the biggest difference between the 2002 performance and the 2003 performance was the man on the sidelines. Parcells knew how to hide weaknesses and manage a game clock.

And NE did more than just exploit lax PI calling...thats almost all they did everytime I watched one of their games(I have Sunday Ticket, so I saw alot of them)...but as I said before, thats beside the point.

Um, I think I agree. NE was more than just exploiting lax PI calling. They are a top-end unit. They stuff the run, they stop the pass, they create turnovers and they make plays.

And you keep saying weak pass rush....what if Wiley returns to his 15 1/2 sack from from a few years back(or however many he has).....it could happen, just like the the loss of Edwards could 'potentially be a big one'.

Big difference. Their is no 'what if' about Edwards being a legit starting CB. That is not speculation, he was your starting CB and he did fine. There is no 'what if' about the Cowboys lacking a pass rush. Those are facts.

What is speculation is that Pete Hunter is an adequate replacement. Of that Wiley can reverse the aging process and be one of the few DEs to rebound over 30. Heck, it isn't like Wiley was a force beforehand either. He had only 2 seasons with more than 10 sacks in his career. He has 17.5 in the other 5 combined. That Hunter will replace Edwards and Wiley rebound are speculations I don't feel comfortable with.

Look at Dallas' first half of last season:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/teamsched?team=dal&year=2003

There defense looked good because most of the teams they played were so bad (that and the NFC East was weak last year too). I doubt Parcells has as an easy time this year, considering both the Giants and Redskins have real coaches again.

Lets take a look at NE schedule:

Buffalo- 30th offense
Philly- 18th offense
NY Jets- 19th offense
Washington- 23rd offense
Tennessee- 8th offense
NY Giants- 20th offense
Miami- 24th offense
Cleveland- 26th offense
Denver- 7th offense
Dallas- 18th offense
Houston- 31st offense
Indianapolis- 3rd offense
Miami- 24th offense
Jacksonville-12th offense
NY Jets- 19th offense
Buffalo- 30th offense

And Dallas:

Atlanta- 29th offense
NY Giants-20th offense
NY Jets- 19th offense
Arizona- 27th offense
Philly- 18th offense
Detroit- 32nd offense
Tampa Bay- 10th offense
Washington- 23rd offense
Buffalo- 30th offense
New England- 17th offense
Carolina- 16th offense
Miami- 24th offense
Philly- 18th offense
Washington- 23rd offense
NY Giants- 20th offense
New Orleans- 11th offense

So is not like all NE played was top 5 offenses and all Dallas played was bottom 5 offense...the time's NE played a decent offense, they gave up a lot of points(30 against TEN, 26 against Denver, 34 against IND)

8 Um, I think I agree. NE was more than just exploiting lax PI calling. They are a top-end unit. They stuff the run, they stop the pass, they create turnovers and they make plays.

Its real easy to stop the pass when your DBs get away with not allowing the opposing WR to run his route by consistantly grabbing them. And you say Dallas cant stop the run...well what about this:

NE- 89.6 YPG allowed rushing
DAL- 89.1 YPG allowed rushing

And the pass:

NE- 202 YPG allowed passing
DAL- 164.4 YPG allowed passing

Whatever. I will let the season do the talking for me. I highly doubt any non-Cowboy's fan would be saying that Dallas has as good of a defense as New England.

The question I have is whether or not Eli Manning is going to live up to all of the hype.

Real deal or way overrated???

The question I have is whether or not Eli Manning is going to live up to all of the hype.

Real deal or way overrated???

I don't think you'll find out either way this upcoming year.

IMO he's overrated. I think he'll eventually become a nice NFL QB, but he won't become a top 5-7 NFL Quarterback.

The Lions will be 9-7. Write it down. I'm not saying play-offs, and if they do qualify, I don't think they'll win a game. Their D is decent, their O is very talented, but inexperienced, and coaching is top end, and they play in a weak Division. A winning record is feasible this year, for the first time in a long time.

The question I have is whether or not Eli Manning is going to live up to all of the hype.

Real deal or way overrated???

Overrated a little...if his name were Eli Smith, he'd be in San Diego this year.

Whatever. I will let the season do the talking for me. I highly doubt any non-Cowboy's fan would be saying that Dallas has as good of a defense as New England.

I've never said that Dallas defense is as good as New England's...Im just saying the gap isnt as big as some people believe.

*sigh*

JCD and John Flyers Fan both have the Saints picked to finish last in the NFC South...I wish I could disagree. :cry:

Go Pats! :handclap:

And no, I'm not a bandwagoner. I've been a fan for a few years and get all their games on satellite (saw every one of them last year except for the 9-3 win over Cleveland because I was at the Oilers' autograph session).

So is not like all NE played was top 5 offenses and all Dallas played was bottom 5 offense...the time's NE played a decent offense, they gave up a lot of points(30 against TEN, 26 against Denver, 34 against IND)
And then look what they did in the playoffs against the Titans and Colts; 28 points combined (14-14).

AFC EAST
1.New England
2.Miami
3.Buffalo
4.NYJ

AFC North
1.Baltimore
2.Pittsburgh
3.Cleveland
4.Cincinatti

AFC South
1.Tenneesee
2.Indianopolis
3.Houston
4.Jacksonville

AFC West
1.Denver
2.Oakland
3.Kansas City
4.San Diego

Wild Cards:Oakland,Indianopolis

NFC East:
1.Dallas
2.Philadelphia
3.NY Giants
4.Washington

NFC North
1.Green Bay
2.Chicago
3.Minnesota
4.Detroit

NFC South
1.Carolina
2.Tampa Bay
3.New Orleans
4.Atlanta

NFC West
1.Seattle
2.St.Louis
3.Arizona
4.San Francisco

WC's:St.Louis and Tampa Bay

And then look what they did in the playoffs against the Titans and Colts; 28 points combined (14-14).

Just like in the NHL, you can get away with even more clutching/grabbing in the playoffs....

Just like in the NHL, you can get away with even more clutching/grabbing in the playoffs....

Come on. That is just idiotic. Patriots are not jst a product of neglected PI calls. Yes, the Patriots pushed the rules. But to here you say that was the reason they were successful just doesn't hold up. It certainly contributed, but they were a talented team regardless.

First off, nobody even came close to them in points against. They had only 238 points against. Next best was 260. A 22 point gap. That is huge. Nobody else was even close.

Second, they had 41 sacks. Sixth best in the league. Only 6 sacks off the league leader. Don't even try to tell me that these were all just coverage sacks.

Third, they led the league with 29 INTs.

Fourth, they had 12 fumble recovers on top of those 29 INTs to finish 4th in takeaways.

Lets toss out statistics and just look at players. Is the talent there to back up the numbers?
-The defensive line started Washington, Seymour and Hamilton. Seymour is an absolute monster. Washington is a top-notch nose tackle. The 'weak link' Hamilton is a quality starter as well. For crying out loud, their 'depth' player was their 1st round draft pick.
-The starting LBs were Bruschi, Vrabel, Phifer and McGinest/Johnson. No stand-outs, but no weak links. An above-average crew at the very least.
-CBs were Law, Poole and Samuel. Law is as good of a CB as you will find, and was so before the Pats decided to push the PI envelope. Poole is a journeyman, but adequate. Weak link here? Nope.
-Harrison and Wilson formed a strong set of safeties. Harrison is about as good of an in-the-box SS as there is in the league.

How anybody can say that this team is just a product of PI calls is beyond me. They benefitted from that, but certainly were not a 1-trick-pony. It would be like saying the Red Wings only won because of the Left Wing Lock. Their success had nothing to do with Bowman, Yzerman, Lidstrom, Konstantinov, Shanahan or Fedorov. Patriots were a dominant defensive team and will remain so even with tighter regulations. Why? Because they have the talent, they have the depth and they have the coaching.

The Lions will be 9-7. Write it down. I'm not saying play-offs, and if they do qualify, I don't think they'll win a game. Their D is decent, their O is very talented, but inexperienced, and coaching is top end, and they play in a weak Division. A winning record is feasible this year, for the first time in a long time.

IMO, they are still a year or two off from that plateau. Just too many youngsters, albeit talented ones, need to come together for that to be possible.

Harrington is still a work in progress. This is his third year, so I do expect big progress. If he doesn't, then it is time to consider the possibility that he may not develop into more than just an adequate player.

Rogers is essentially a rookie, having missed so much time last year. Pair him with a rookie WR and you have growing pains to experience. WRs take a good long while to adapt the the NFL, routes are ar more complex and tougher to pull a move on a CB. Streets will help some.

RBs typically hit the ground running, literally. The smoothest transition from college to pro, so I wouldn't worry here.

I think the defense should be decent, even with questions at safety, LB and DE, but the offense is going to be spotty. I think 7-9 or 8-8 is the best-case scenario.

Come on. That is just idiotic. Patriots are not jst a product of neglected PI calls. Yes, the Patriots pushed the rules. But to here you say that was the reason they were successful just doesn't hold up. It certainly contributed, but they were a talented team regardless.

First off, nobody even came close to them in points against. They had only 238 points against. Next best was 260. A 22 point gap. That is huge. Nobody else was even close.

Second, they had 41 sacks. Sixth best in the league. Only 6 sacks off the league leader. Don't even try to tell me that these were all just coverage sacks.

Third, they led the league with 29 INTs.

Fourth, they had 12 fumble recovers on top of those 29 INTs to finish 4th in takeaways.

Lets toss out statistics and just look at players. Is the talent there to back up the numbers?
-The defensive line started Washington, Seymour and Hamilton. Seymour is an absolute monster. Washington is a top-notch nose tackle. The 'weak link' Hamilton is a quality starter as well. For crying out loud, their 'depth' player was their 1st round draft pick.
-The starting LBs were Bruschi, Vrabel, Phifer and McGinest/Johnson. No stand-outs, but no weak links. An above-average crew at the very least.
-CBs were Law, Poole and Samuel. Law is as good of a CB as you will find, and was so before the Pats decided to push the PI envelope. Poole is a journeyman, but adequate. Weak link here? Nope.
-Harrison and Wilson formed a strong set of safeties. Harrison is about as good of an in-the-box SS as there is in the league.

How anybody can say that this team is just a product of PI calls is beyond me. They benefitted from that, but certainly were not a 1-trick-pony. It would be like saying the Red Wings only won because of the Left Wing Lock. Their success had nothing to do with Bowman, Yzerman, Lidstrom, Konstantinov, Shanahan or Fedorov. Patriots were a dominant defensive team and will remain so even with tighter regulations. Why? Because they have the talent, they have the depth and they have the coaching.

Again, I never said the sole reason they were good was the lack of calls against them..Im simply stating that they took advantage of it much more than any team. Are they a great defense? Yes. But the gap between them and the top 3-5 other defenses isnt as larges as some think. They arent head and shoulder's above everyone else IMO, and it will show this year, as long as the NFL actually sticks to its guns and enforces the rules as they have said they will.