Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Sports Talk
Reload this Page >

I just noticed something looking at the NFL standings

Sports Talk Discuss all things Sports Related

I just noticed something looking at the NFL standings

Old 12-09-02, 02:42 AM
  #1  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,049
I just noticed something looking at the NFL standings

The Carolina Panthers have the same record as the St.Louis Rams!

Also the NFC North is downright ugly. Green Bay must be really proud of winning that crap division
evenflow is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 11:45 AM
  #2  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 22,995
There are only three tough divisions in the league IMO.
AFC East
AFC West
NFC South

The rest are like you stated, crap division. Also, dominating team(s) do not exist anymore. Winning team beating a winning team on the road these days are kind of rare.
Myster X is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 12:05 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: is everything
Posts: 17,990
Re: I just noticed something looking at the NFL standings

Originally posted by evenflowddt
Also the NFC North is downright ugly. Green Bay must be really proud of winning that crap division

Iron Chef is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 01:45 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,398
Originally posted by mysterX
There are only three tough divisions in the league IMO.
AFC East
AFC West
NFC South

The rest are like you stated, crap division. Also, dominating team(s) do not exist anymore. Winning team beating a winning team on the road these days are kind of rare.
Yeah the AFC East is so tough that the top two teams in that division got killed by the Packers, the leader of the crap division.
BrewCrew is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 02:27 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 833
Originally posted by BrewCrew
Yeah the AFC East is so tough that the top two teams in that division got killed by the Packers, the leader of the crap division.
Very interesting... Isn't it?

Packers have to take care of the 40-whiners this weekend. Lions have to upset the Bucs. And Washington has to beat Philly.

Well, I can at least hope, can't I?
agrall is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 02:39 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Legend
 
LurkerDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The People's Republic of Boulder
Posts: 21,998
Re: I just noticed something looking at the NFL standings

Originally posted by evenflowddt
Also the NFC North is downright ugly. Green Bay must be really proud of winning that crap division
Just because the division is crap does not mean that the Pack are crap. I'm no cheesehead, but they are clearly one of the elite teams in the league. The records of their division rivals doesn't change that.
LurkerDan is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 03:34 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 10,614


I wonder who will end up with the better record!
Da Thrilla is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 03:44 PM
  #8  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 22,995
Originally posted by BrewCrew
Yeah the AFC East is so tough that the top two teams in that division got killed by the Packers, the leader of the crap division.
You think the Packers' division is tougher than the AFC east?
Myster X is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 03:50 PM
  #9  
Retired
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 27,449
I believe his point was that Divisions don't matter, and Green Bay is better than any team in the AFC east, as evidenced by them killing the top two teams.
Josh H is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 04:48 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,398
Originally posted by mysterX
You think the Packers' division is tougher than the AFC east?
Do I think the Bears, Lions or Vikings are better than anybody in the AFC East. No. But I do believe the Packers are much better than any team in the AFC East. I just get tired of people complaining how easy the Packers have it. There are only six games within the division which leaves games against every team from the AFC East and NFC South plus a game at San Francisco. So the Packers should be proud to win their division even though the teams within their division are not very good.
BrewCrew is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 04:49 PM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 623
Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
I believe his point was that Divisions don't matter, and Green Bay is better than any team in the AFC east, as evidenced by them killing the top two teams.


When they beat the Dolphins they had Lucas throwing passes and could focus entirely on Ricky Williams, if they faced a healthy Miami team the outcome would be very different. Lucas is so bad that you might as well give the opposing team a few touchdowns at the beginning of the game since you know he will throw twice as many picks as TD's, with Fiedler at 100% they can do play action off the running game and are a completely different team.

The only way the Packers will make it to the super bowl is if they manage to have home field advantage through the playoffs since with out home field advantage they are too weak of a team to win out.

I am hoping the dolphins get a real back up QB during the off season
bluntman72 is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 04:58 PM
  #12  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 22,995
Originally posted by BrewCrew
Do I think the Bears, Lions or Vikings are better than anybody in the AFC East. No. But I do believe the Packers are much better than any team in the AFC East. I just get tired of people complaining how easy the Packers have it. There are only six games within the division which leaves games against every team from the AFC East and NFC South plus a game at San Francisco. So the Packers should be proud to win their division even though the teams within their division are not very good.
Well, that's another story. We're talking about division here, not comparing teams. I'll say the Packers are a team to beat if they can prove that they can win on the road against a winning team. That is something the Packers hasn't done this season. If you're gonna say the Packs beat the Pats, well, look at the teams the Pats beat this year. Again, very few teams today can win against a formidable opponent on the road.
Myster X is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 05:06 PM
  #13  
Mod Emeritus
 
Gallant Pig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 15,325
Can anyone clearly say the Packers are better than the Vikings by their two games this year? Minnesota nicely beat them in the first game and then barely lost the last one. Not sure someone could make the case there, except only when you consider that Greenbay has beat more teams. But in head to head, I say Minnesota is better than Greenbay this year.
Gallant Pig is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 09:47 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: PA
Posts: 1,173
I don't even like football anymore. Thanks Pittsburgh.
The Governor is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 10:09 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 833
Originally posted by Gallant Pig
Can anyone clearly say the Packers are better than the Vikings by their two games this year? Minnesota nicely beat them in the first game and then barely lost the last one. Not sure someone could make the case there, except only when you consider that Greenbay has beat more teams. But in head to head, I say Minnesota is better than Greenbay this year.
Well, of course we all know that the Rams are better than the Raiders and the Chargers this year... After all, they beat both of them...

Oh... and the Lions are better than the Saints...

The point is... Anyone has a chance on any given Sunday. The Vikings are having a pretty sucky year, while the Packers have done pretty well. It's the overall record that counts. But, anything can happen when 2 teams play. Especially when it is such a big rivalry as exists between the Vikings and Packers. You can throw the records out the window when those 2 teams play. It's going to be a tough game.

Last edited by agrall; 12-09-02 at 10:13 PM.
agrall is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 11:29 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 30,005
Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
I believe his point was that Divisions don't matter, and Green Bay is better than any team in the AFC east, as evidenced by them killing the top two teams.
If they were to meet in the Superbowl (it's in San Diego this year, isn't it?) it will not be under 34 degrees and there won't be any snow. Assuming a healthy Miami team I'll pick Fiedler, Williams and the Dolphins over the Packers.
movielib is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 11:36 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Shackled
Posts: 35,372
Originally posted by Josh Hinkle
I believe his point was that Divisions don't matter, and Green Bay is better than any team in the AFC east, as evidenced by them killing the top two teams.
Similarly, Houston is better than the teams it has beat, same goes with Chicago, and Detroit. If you beat a team, you are automatically better than them and everyone who is below them in the standings. Good point.
Bushdog is offline  
Old 12-09-02, 11:59 PM
  #18  
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Right Behind You
Posts: 4,986
I just noticed something about the standings every top team in the NFC has a better record than every top team in the AFC. I'll be happy to see the NFC win the Super Bowl this year because there isn't a single team in the AFC that can stop the Eagles/Bucs/Packers/.
lesterlong is offline  
Old 12-10-02, 12:16 AM
  #19  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 30,005
Originally posted by lesterlong
I just noticed something about the standings every top team in the NFC has a better record than every top team in the AFC. I'll be happy to see the NFC win the Super Bowl this year because there isn't a single team in the AFC that can stop the Eagles/Bucs/Packers/.
I just noticed something about the standings. After tonight's massacre the AFC will be +5 overall on the NFC.

It's easier to have better records when you have more crap teams to beat up on.

Edited to add:

I just noticed something else. The NFC has nine teams (over half ) with 5 or fewer wins. The AFC has three (and one is the expansion team).

Last edited by movielib; 12-10-02 at 12:42 AM.
movielib is offline  
Old 12-10-02, 05:15 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 1,102
also remember the nfl is all about parity these days. any team can be good any year. the bears were 13-3 last year and are headed for 3-13 this year. of the vikings 10 losses, 8 were by a touchdown or less. i am not saying they are good, but they could easily be better and would argue that they are better than their record indicates. the packers still deserve credit for winning their division. just because the other teams suck doesnt mean the packers have to beat them. they could play down to their level, lose a few of those games and be looking at 7-6 instead of 10-3.
nchhabra is offline  
Old 12-10-02, 06:58 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,752
I was reading the standings today also to see that my Bears are tied for second in the North 8)

On a serious note if the Pac had a 4-9 record they would lead the division,one of these years that will happen.
DVDHO is offline  
Old 12-11-02, 07:16 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 1,102
Originally posted by DVDHO
I was reading the standings today also to see that my Bears are tied for second in the North 8)

On a serious note if the Pac had a 4-9 record they would lead the division,one of these years that will happen.
The only thing is if the Packers were 4-9, it means some of their 9 losses would have come in the division, thus the other teams wouldn't be 3-10. More like 6-7 or 7-6.
nchhabra is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.