Official NFL Discussion Thread

[jbergey_2005]

Um, you asked? Your own explanation of the college system showed that no, the game can't end on every play. It's not just 22 guys with helmets on the field. There's game clocks and field position and special teams, and none of that is there, so no, it's not the same game.

 

 

I dont want to get into this argument because I agree with both of you in different ways however a college OT can end on every play. An int return for a TD, fumble return for a td, or block fg return for a td are a few examples. I know its rare but it could happen and it has happened.

[lazorbeak]

See it's funny because you don't bring evidence today Mr. Beak. In fact that one play comment you made a minute ago made no sense.

 

Please learn to read. Then learn to write complete thoughts and end them with periods. Again, you have no idea what evidence is. Those weird "facts" and "numbers" I bring up are EVIDENCE. When I say that 60% of games are won by the team that wins the coin toss that is a fact. Again, 52% of games are won in college by coin tosses, while we're at it.

 

Where in the hell did you get Logan's response as saying it's one play?

 

Gee, maybe this:

 

Originally Posted by LoganRodzen:

"And in college OT you're not one play away from losing it all?"

 

 

Most educated people read that and say "hey, he's saying that it's not one play". Then they read you tirade explaining what one play is. Then agreeing with Mr. Logan's comment

 

PERIOD. You end thoughts with one. Try it! Also I wish I lived in a world where tirades were three sentence long explanations. And I still don't think you understood what Logan and I were talking about, but that's about the level of comprehension I expect. Go back and read what we each said again and don't immediately throw up a poorly written brain-fart saying "nuh uh nobody said that never" when I can very easily find where someone did in fact say that... ever.

 

Now could you give me your evidence to how NFL's system is fair............ Oh that's right you can't. Hell, if it was then they wouldn't be changing it.

 

Fortunately for me: that isn't what I've been arguing! See how that works?

 

But way to completely miss the point of an obvious metaphor and proceed to state the obvious for the mentally deficient. It's no less than I'd expect of you.

 

jbergey that is statistically true. My problem with it is more about the lack of playing real football with standard rules, the "everyone gets a turn" aspect and the padded stats that it creates.

[LoganRodzen]

Um, you asked? Your own explanation of the college system showed that no, the game can't end on every play. It's not just 22 guys with helmets on the field. There's game clocks and field position and special teams, and none of that is there, so no, it's not the same game.

 

The fact that you were injured or played football has very little to do with the subject at hand. Guess what? I was injured and played football too! Not at the same time though, so I guess I don't have the same argument to authority.

 

Yeah, it was used for a comparison. Sorry, forgot that some people have absolutely no idea what sports are played in the world at large.

 

It can end in one play in OT if you're the first team. They can scoop up a fumble and run it for a TD. They can get an INT and run it back for a TD. That's why it's important to win the coin toss in both college and the NFL. Being able to select offense/defense in college OT can be the deciding factor, much like the receiving team has the edge in the NFL.

 

The point I was trying to make out of all of this was that college OT will never leave you hanging (tie) and a team will never feel screwed because the opportunities are equal. Why do I say it's equal even though the team who plays defense first has the 'advantage'? Because ultimately it comes down to home field advantage vs away team getting the chance to win the coin toss. Some parts of the OT aren't fair but when you look at it as a whole it is.

 

My injury while playing football was relevant to the discussion because you asked me, "do you know what 'one play' means?" It was my example showing you that I do know what it means.

 

Oh, you think because I said "American football" that I don't know what sports are popular around the world? I'm just the average dumb American who thinks our sports rule everything? I guess the fact there's a World Cup wouldn't give it away or the fact my best friend played soccer throughout high school and I picked up more about it than I ever wanted to.

 

Yes, I know it's the most played sport in every part of the world. But do you know why? Because soccer balls are extremely inexpensive and you don't even need equipment OR shoes to play it. I remember watching a segment on ESPN and these people were sending soccer balls to third-world countries for all the people, but mostly the children. They don't have any money but they can play soccer. Hooray!

 

Overall - you come across as extremely arrogant in your responses and consider our discussion over.

[lazorbeak]

 

Overall - you come across as extremely arrogant in your responses and consider our discussion over.

 

I have nothing against you and nothing but respect for opinions of others, even when they are based on total misunderstandings of things I've said. It's not arrogance to point out logical fallacies like an "appeal to authority" or "appeal to emotion," since neither have logical significance but make the speaker sound informed and generate sympathy.

[BHK1978]

Please learn to read. Then learn to write complete thoughts and end them with periods. Again, you have no idea what evidence is. Those weird "facts" and "numbers" I bring up are EVIDENCE. When I say that 60% of games are won by the team that wins the coin toss that is a fact. Again, 52% of games are won in college by coin tosses, while we're at it.

 

 

 

Gee, maybe this:

 

Originally Posted by LoganRodzen:

"And in college OT you're not one play away from losing it all?"

 

 

 

 

PERIOD. You end thoughts with one. Try it! Also I wish I lived in a world where tirades were three sentence long explanations. And I still don't think you understood what Logan and I were talking about, but that's about the level of comprehension I expect. Go back and read what we each said again and don't immediately throw up a poorly written brain-fart saying "nuh uh nobody said that never" when I can very easily find where someone did in fact say that... ever.

 

 

 

Fortunately for me: that isn't what I've been arguing! See how that works?

 

But way to completely miss the point of an obvious metaphor and proceed to state the obvious for the mentally deficient. It's no less than I'd expect of you.

 

jbergey that is statistically true. My problem with it is more about the lack of playing real football with standard rules, the "everyone gets a turn" aspect and the padded stats that it creates.

 

Off topic, but Lazorbeak you felt disrespected when I directed one of these: at you. Yet you have no problem what so ever mocking the intelligence of others. I guess you do not like it when people do it to you, but you have no problem doing it to others.

[GatorBait19]

Please learn to read. Then learn to write complete thoughts and end them with periods. Again, you have no idea what evidence is. Those weird "facts" and "numbers" I bring up are EVIDENCE. When I say that 60% of games are won by the team that wins the coin toss that is a fact. Again, 52% of games are won in college by coin tosses, while we're at it.

 

 

 

Gee, maybe this:

 

Originally Posted by LoganRodzen:

"And in college OT you're not one play away from losing it all?"

 

 

 

 

PERIOD. You end thoughts with one. Try it! Also I wish I lived in a world where tirades were three sentence long explanations. And I still don't think you understood what Logan and I were talking about, but that's about the level of comprehension I expect. Go back and read what we each said again and don't immediately throw up a poorly written brain-fart saying "nuh uh nobody said that never" when I can very easily find where someone did in fact say that... ever.

 

 

 

Fortunately for me: that isn't what I've been arguing! See how that works?

 

But way to completely miss the point of an obvious metaphor and proceed to state the obvious for the mentally deficient. It's no less than I'd expect of you.

 

jbergey that is statistically true. My problem with it is more about the lack of playing real football with standard rules, the "everyone gets a turn" aspect and the padded stats that it creates.

 

 

No, I didn't miss the metaphor. Next time maybe you should use one that works.

 

Also, are you a flaming idiot? You've been arguing this whole time about how the NFL is more exciting! I on the other hand actually on the other hand gave support to why College OT is more fair and just as exciting.

 

1) (you actually helped me with this one, thanks sweetie) In NFL, the team who wins the coin toss in OT wins 60% of the time. In College OT the team who wins the coin toss wins only 52% of the time........... yeah those stats help me in point out......... wait for it...... wait a little longer...... IT'S FAIR GAME

 

2) You say NFL OT is exciting because one play could end the game. While this is true I came in with the fact that most of the greatest games in college football history were finished in OT.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoganRodzen

And in college OT you're not one play away from losing it all? An INT or fumble gives the other team the ball and they can kick a FG and win it.

 

You: Do you know what "one play" means? It means one play. Giving the other team the ball and the chance to score doesn't end the game. Hence not "one play."

 

Yeah, we could completely not see you agreeing with him there.

 

 

Also, like I said yesterday I am not trying to make sure my stuff is on point. I could careless if you can read it or not. While on the subject here......

 

 

Um, you asked? Your own explanation of the college system showed that no, the game can't end on every play. It's not just 22 guys with helmets on the field. There's game clocks and field position and special teams, and none of that is there, so no, it's not the same game.

 

1)Period after field was for?

 

2) plus the use of commas listing items instead of and.

 

3)Seriously, seven overtimes. Seven.

 

4) Who was it that when they won the coin toss elected to "win" and then proceeded to turn the ball over for a game-ending interception? WHAT?

 

you make gammar mistakes as well sweetheart. You just have time to sit there in between porn videos to reread what you wrote. Me personally, I couldn't give a crap.

[GatorBait19]

I have nothing against you and nothing but respect for opinions of others, even when they are based on total misunderstandings of things I've said. It's not arrogance to point out logical fallacies like an "appeal to authority" or "appeal to emotion," since neither have logical significance but make the speaker sound informed and generate sympathy.

 

It's amazing you have respect for opinion when you quite literally say you don't.

 

Second we give you facts you just don't care enough and only beat your facts to death (even when people give you more than two facts).

 

But since you are the all mighty ruler and most knowledgeable about anything and everything to sports, I assume we all must pander to your wishes. (more of to save our own insanity) Caio

[GruntMark]

The first thing Id do is ditch the coin toss for OT and go with something merit based. (First downs or ToP)

[PeterHilton]

It's amazing you have respect for opinion when you quite literally say you don't.

 

Second we give you facts you just don't care enough and only beat your facts to death (even when people give you more than two facts).

 

But since you are the all mighty ruler and most knowledgeable about anything and everything to sports, I assume we all must pander to your wishes. (more of to save our own insanity) Caio

 

To be fair..in reading enough of lazorbeak's posts I can see where he can come across as being rude.

 

But Gator..you are extremely frustrating to debate with. You flip around and attach value to tiny niggling little points that have nothing to do with the over-all topic. ( I mean..really? you needed me to clarify that "harder to coach" and "harder to have success as a coach" were basically the same thing as it related to what we were talking about? REALLY??)

 

Also...if this is lingering animosity from that basketball thread, let it go. lazorbeak won that argument. I read it...you weren't making any sense. You actually said at one point the Eastern conference was beter because more players are born in the east. It was crazy talk.

[Stennick]

To be fair..in reading enough of lazorbeak's posts I can see where he can come across as being rude.

 

But Gator..you are extremely frustrating to debate with. You flip around and attach value to tiny niggling little points that have nothing to do with the over-all topic. ( I mean..really? you needed me to clarify that "harder to coach" and "harder to have success as a coach" were basically the same thing as it related to what we were talking about? REALLY??)

 

Also...if this is lingering animosity from that basketball thread, let it go. lazorbeak won that argument. I read it...you weren't making any sense. You actually said at one point the Eastern conference was beter because more players are born in the east. It was crazy talk.

 

I've always found the way to win a debate it so spit jibberish so that my opponent is confused and while he's dazed I sneak in another post claiming vicotry and then say something like "Bryan Daniels sucks" and slip out. Thats equal to dropping a grenade behind you as you jump outta the building. Your gonna blow your opponent up and start a firestorm behind you

[moon_lit_tears]

The first thing Id do is ditch the coin toss for OT and go with something merit based. (First downs or ToP)

I agree. In the NFL the coin flip in OT is a bit dumb.

 

You guys are so Well anyway as a rare female (so I have been told) who likes footballl, I am pretty scared to comment. You all can be harsh.

 

Gator, You sir are funny. :p Your points are spot on.

[PeterHilton]

I've always found the way to win a debate it so spit jibberish so that my opponent is confused and while he's dazed I sneak in another post claiming vicotry and then say something like "Bryan Daniels sucks" and slip out. Thats equal to dropping a grenade behind you as you jump outta the building. Your gonna blow your opponent up and start a firestorm behind you

 

I like that theory. It'd be especially chaotic in a non-wrestling thread.

[GatorBait19]

To be fair..in reading enough of lazorbeak's posts I can see where he can come across as being rude.

 

But Gator..you are extremely frustrating to debate with. You flip around and attach value to tiny niggling little points that have nothing to do with the over-all topic. ( I mean..really? you needed me to clarify that "harder to coach" and "harder to have success as a coach" were basically the same thing as it related to what we were talking about? REALLY??)

 

Also...if this is lingering animosity from that basketball thread, let it go. lazorbeak won that argument. I read it...you weren't making any sense. You actually said at one point the Eastern conference was beter because more players are born in the east. It was crazy talk.

 

I stick by that, where a player is from has a lot of influence. Think about it, A football player from Wyoming is the top rated player in his state. Now there is a kid in Florida who is just as talented but is considered the 50th best player in his state.

 

So do you take the Wyoming guy or the Florida guy? FLORIDA because he played with top talent. lol but that's me nitpicking

 

With your argument I believe there is a difference in being successful and being able to coach. Norv Tuner is a great coach, not to successful. Same with Marty, won countless games but couldn't win the big one. Does that make them bad coaches? To me (like I said from the begining) there is a difference between it being hard to coach (cause let's face it, your style of coaching never changes from NCAA to NFL) to being successful.

 

When you handle kids most of your life then go to pros and have to handle grown men, it's more difficult. Jimmie Johnson with the Cowboys drafted a bunch of college players he coached against or they played for him. He was successful with this as he was still dealing with premature adults.

 

Coaching skills don't disappear when someone goes to the next level. Success might, but not coaching. This is why I believe it's harder to be a success, not a coach.

[lazorbeak]

Off topic, but Lazorbeak you felt disrespected when I directed one of these: at you. Yet you have no problem what so ever mocking the intelligence of others. I guess you do not like it when people do it to you, but you have no problem doing it to others.

 

No, I don't like being disrespected when I'm having an intelligent exchange of ideas. But I don't respect someone that fails to grasp rudimentary concepts, fails to understand what evidence is, fails to know what opinions are, fails to use spelling and grammar at a high school level. Basically I don't respect people that are incapable of having an intelligent back and forth.

 

Also, are you a flaming idiot? You've been arguing this whole time about how the NFL is more exciting! I on the other hand actually on the other hand gave support to why College OT is more fair and just as exciting.

 

When did excitement and fairness become interchangeable? Do you even read the things I say? How about the things you say? It's like arguing with a petulant child.

 

1) (you actually helped me with this one, thanks sweetie) In NFL, the team who wins the coin toss in OT wins 60% of the time. In College OT the team who wins the coin toss wins only 52% of the time........... yeah those stats help me in point out......... wait for it...... wait a little longer...... IT'S FAIR GAME

 

Again, put 2 and 2 together, take off the rubber pants, undo those velcro snaps, and otherwise stop showing the reading comprehension of a 5th Grade ESL student. If you think that I am arguing with you and that I am voluntarily bringing up evidence that helps you, chances are you don't understand my argument! Again, when did I ever argue the current system was more fair? I'll do this one for you: NEVER!

 

2) You say NFL OT is exciting because one play could end the game. While this is true I came in with the fact that most of the greatest games in college football history were finished in OT.

 

Congratulations, you showed a basic understanding of something I said and agreed with it. I feel like this is progress! Of course then you brought up how a nonsensical list with a limited range somehow disputed my point, when in reality, it has nothing to do with anything. Thank God you're not a Scientist. "Hey guys here's some data. No, it has no control group. No, it's not on the topic we're researching. No, it proves absolutely nothing. Guys? Guys?"

 

Also, like I said yesterday I am not trying to make sure my stuff is on point. I could careless if you can read it or not. While on the subject here......

 

 

 

1)Period after field was for?

 

 

It's the end of a complete thought. The period is what goes there. Confusing, I know.

 

2) plus the use of commas listing items instead of and.

 

They should build a statue out of Osmium (look up density) in your image. Commas can be used to list items. Seriously if you're going to try to nit-pick me try to find places where I actually did something wrong!

 

3)Seriously, seven overtimes. Seven.

 

Repetition creates emphasis. It is a rhetorical device. Again, not a mistake. You're really, really bad at this, aren't you? I mean I feel like I should send a note to your teacher for this nonsense.

 

4) Who was it that when they won the coin toss elected to "win" and then proceeded to turn the ball over for a game-ending interception? WHAT?

 

A non-specific example isn't a grammar mistake, sport. If you had the basic competence necessary to use google, you'd find I was referencing a Packers/Seahawks game where the Seahawks won the toss, elected to "win," then lost the game on an interception returned for a touchdown. Yes, I didn't tie your shoes for you or cut the corners off your sandwich, because I am not your special needs tutor.

 

you make gammar mistakes as well sweetheart. You just have time to sit there in between porn videos to reread what you wrote. Me personally, I couldn't give a crap.

 

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! Yes, I do make "gammar" mistakes now and then (of course, you couldn't manage to find one), but fixing the mistakes of others is probably a bit advanced for your level. And again, it's an issue of readability. When you just start writing rambling nonsense not in sentences I just don't read it. It's not my job to decode your nonsense.

 

It's amazing you have respect for opinion when you quite literally say you don't.

 

Second we give you facts you just don't care enough and only beat your facts to death (even when people give you more than two facts).

 

But since you are the all mighty ruler and most knowledgeable about anything and everything to sports, I assume we all must pander to your wishes. (more of to save our own insanity) Caio

 

It's amazing how poor your reading skills are. Seriously. No, I didn't "literally" say I didn't respect his opinions. In fact, I said the exact opposite of that! I said that it isn't arrogance to point out logical fallacies. And guess what? It's NOT!

 

And yes, it's funny how I ignore facts that are completely irrelevant. I'm so weird like that. I think you'll find most everyone is weird like that! Also this point itself is pretty irrelevant to what you're quoting, but you've got (dull) axes to grind, so go for it. Who cares if it has nothing to do with what you've quoted?

 

And finally, "almighty" is the word you were looking for, and you don't use commas without conjunctions: either use a semi-colon throw in an "and"! Finally, parenthetical statements shouldn't take place outside of sentences. Ciao is spelled wrong. "Gammar" is not a word. Things not said by you should be in quotation marks, or, failing that, quote tags.

 

Have a nice day, kiddo.

[moon_lit_tears]

I like that theory. It'd be especially chaotic in a non-wrestling thread.

 

 

Wait...They have non-wrestling threads on here? You lie!!

[lazorbeak]

To be fair..in reading enough of lazorbeak's posts I can see where he can come across as being rude.

 

But Gator..you are extremely frustrating to debate with. You flip around and attach value to tiny niggling little points that have nothing to do with the over-all topic. ( I mean..really? you needed me to clarify that "harder to coach" and "harder to have success as a coach" were basically the same thing as it related to what we were talking about? REALLY??)

 

Also...if this is lingering animosity from that basketball thread, let it go. lazorbeak won that argument. I read it...you weren't making any sense. You actually said at one point the Eastern conference was beter because more players are born in the east. It was crazy talk.

 

Oh, I know I can be rude, that is definitely true. But yeah, it's frustrating to have any exchange of ideas with someone who has no apparent interest in actually exchanging ideas. Quoting sentences at a time and trying to say "gotcha!" is just as bad as rudeness, moreso because while I can be rude I am not trying to "win" an argument by catching someone in a minor bit of confusion but am seriously trying to rebut the things they've actually said and arguments they've actually made. But there's really not much point in doing that with someone who isn't going to concede even when they're arguing water isn't wet, but is going to throw up some unformatted gibberish that lists things that are wet that aren't water (ew I just grossed myself out with my own example). Seriously it's like wrestling a semi-literate Proteus (google it if you don't get the reference).

 

You actually said at one point the Eastern conference was beter

 

GOTCHA! You made a typo! Let's argue about this for 3 posts before you explain that when you said "beter" you meant "better."

 

On second thought, let's not.

[jbergey_2005]

I stick by that, where a player is from has a lot of influence. Think about it, A football player from Wyoming is the top rated player in his state. Now there is a kid in Florida who is just as talented but is considered the 50th best player in his state.

 

So do you take the Wyoming guy or the Florida guy? FLORIDA because he played with top talent. lol but that's me nitpicking

 

With your argument I believe there is a difference in being successful and being able to coach. Norv Tuner is a great coach, not to successful. Same with Marty, won countless games but couldn't win the big one. Does that make them bad coaches? To me (like I said from the begining) there is a difference between it being hard to coach (cause let's face it, your style of coaching never changes from NCAA to NFL) to being successful.

 

When you handle kids most of your life then go to pros and have to handle grown men, it's more difficult. Jimmie Johnson with the Cowboys drafted a bunch of college players he coached against or they played for him. He was successful with this as he was still dealing with premature adults.

 

Coaching skills don't disappear when someone goes to the next level. Success might, but not coaching. This is why I believe it's harder to be a success, not a coach.

 

What?

 

What does what state they came from have to do with how good of a player they are in the NBA? They are all playing against professionals.

 

Also, what does Jimmy Johnson and who he coached have to do with anything being discussed?

 

Am I the only one confused?

 

You've lost me Gator.

[PeterHilton]

I stick by that, where a player is from has a lot of influence. Think about it, A football player from Wyoming is the top rated player in his state. Now there is a kid in Florida who is just as talented but is considered the 50th best player in his state.

 

So do you take the Wyoming guy or the Florida guy? FLORIDA because he played with top talent. lol but that's me nitpicking

 

It's - in all honesty - a completely ridiculous argument as it relates to comparing two professional sports conferences.

 

Kobe Bryant played HS ball in Philly. So based on your argument do I count him when I talk about the 76ers? Philly basketball? wtf? That makes no sense. How do you not see that?

 

If you are comparing teams from different conferences, you evaluate the player on those rosters. Period.

 

With your argument I believe there is a difference in being successful and being able to coach. Norv Tuner is a great coach, not to successful. Same with Marty, won countless games but couldn't win the big one. Does that make them bad coaches? To me (like I said from the begining) there is a difference between it being hard to coach (cause let's face it, your style of coaching never changes from NCAA to NFL) to being successful.

 

When you handle kids most of your life then go to pros and have to handle grown men, it's more difficult. Jimmie Johnson with the Cowboys drafted a bunch of college players he coached against or they played for him. He was successful with this as he was still dealing with premature adults.

 

Coaching skills don't disappear when someone goes to the next level. Success might, but not coaching. This is why I believe it's harder to be a success, not a coach.

 

No. Sorry. It's semantics. I don't see it.

 

What's the purpose of being in a position like head coach in pro sports? To win games. To succeed.

 

If you're not going to succeed then why are you coaching? Does a professional sports franchise hire a coach to be mediocre.

 

"Oh yeah ..don't worry about the wins and losses...we'll keep you around for years because you're so great at setting up 3-on-3 passing drills and patting guys on the ass"

 

Being a successful head coach and being a head coach is the same thing. Nobody hires a coach to not succeed so it's pointless to try to split hairs in this instance.

[jbergey_2005]

I am ready for a change of subject I think.

 

I really like the Jets this year. I know they are an easy prediction to make a huge jump in the standings but with that defense and that offensive line they are going to be hard to beat.

 

The NFC appears to be a crapshoot IMO. I am a huge Vikings fan but I worry that they blew their chance last year. I dont think the Saints can sneak up on people again so Im not sure who I think is the favorite in the NFC.

[PeterHilton]

I am ready for a change of subject I think.

 

I really like the Jets this year. I know they are an easy prediction to make a huge jump in the standings but with that defense and that offensive line they are going to be hard to beat.

 

If the personalities on that team don't tear them apart, and they get the same kind of performance out the OLine, I think they win the division.

[jbergey_2005]

If the personalities on that team don't tear them apart, and they get the same kind of performance out the OLine, I think they win the division.

 

You make a good point. That is going to be a circus over there if they struggle early with some of them players and that coach.

[GruntMark]

If the personalities on that team don't tear them apart, and they get the same kind of performance out the OLine, I think they win the division.

 

As a general rule I dont bet against B & B....and the Jets, thats not a bandwagon Im getting on yet. They have the media hyping the hell out of them, and I usually avoid that circus. (See: Bears. Last year.) And they made the playoffs last year basause they beat Curtis Painter. Im not impressed.

 

Also, the Dolphins should be interesting. They lost some heartbreakers last year. Marshall might be just enough to push them over the top in those games.

 

Should be one of the more fun division to watch.

 

Except for the Bills. They'll suck.

[BHK1978]

I am ready for a change of subject I think.

 

I really like the Jets this year. I know they are an easy prediction to make a huge jump in the standings but with that defense and that offensive line they are going to be hard to beat.

 

The NFC appears to be a crapshoot IMO. I am a huge Vikings fan but I worry that they blew their chance last year. I dont think the Saints can sneak up on people again so Im not sure who I think is the favorite in the NFC.

 

Here is what is going to happen in the NFC. The Giants are going to win their first six or seven games! They are going to look like the best team in the NFC. And they they are going to lose their next nine or ten games an finish with either a 7-9 or 6-10 record! It happens every year so why should this year be any different?

[GruntMark]

 

The NFC appears to be a crapshoot IMO. I am a huge Vikings fan but I worry that they blew their chance last year. I dont think the Saints can sneak up on people again so Im not sure who I think is the favorite in the NFC.

 

I dont think the Saints get back to the Super Bowl this coming season.

 

Probably either the Packers or Cowboys. Vikings have a legit shot as well if Favre comes back. And he probably will.

[lazorbeak]

Here is what is going to happen in the NFC. The Giants are going to win their first six or seven games! They are going to look like the best team in the NFC. And they they are going to lose their next nine or ten games an finish with either a 7-9 or 6-10 record! It happens every year so why should this year be any different?

 

Commentators for the first six weeks will insist that Eli Manning has finally figured out playing QB at an elite level and then will quietly stop bringing it up as the Giants fizzle. By week 15 people will wonder if Coughlin should keep his job.

 

Oh, while we're on the subject of the NFC East: the Cowboys will blow the doors off some bad teams until Thanksgiving. After Thanksgiving they will go colder than Siberia and limp into the playoffs where they'll be beaten in the first round.