Poor Vikings.

[Afino]

Originally Posted by Erik W.

Your post would carry more weight if the Redskins weren't a chipshot field goal away from beating the Saints. And the Redskins are TERRIBLE.

Yeah, probably picked the wrong week to say that.

But you can also say if the Saints can pull out a game like that they had no business winning, well, they just might be invincible.

[jaxmagicman]

I know the Redskins do not have the best record, but they have been playing teams tough. They just can't close them out. And they have the best secondary in the league. It was a bad match-up for the Saints. Coming off a win over the Patriots and going into a division game.

I think the Vikings showed that they are vulnerable outside. But they may not be outside in the Playoffs until they are in Miami.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by phightin

Vikes are good but this was eventually coming. If anything this week has proven that the saints are the class of the nfc and maybe even the league. Favre and Peterson together are good but they just don't compare to Brees and the weapons the Saints have.

So the Saints win a game the Redskins(3-9) handed to them, yet today clearly defines who is the team to beat in the NFC. Interesting rational.

The Vikings and Saints both have issues. Obviously giving up 450 yards to the Redskins says that your defense is capable of giving up yards to anyone.

More concerning with the Vikings is they lost their All Pro caliber Middle linebacker.

[Delgadodawg]

The Saints missing their top 3 cornerbacks really hurt them today. Washington abused their 4 and 5 guys, especially the rookie Jenkins.

Their top 2, Greer and Porter, have played really well this season, so if they are back before the playoffs the defense should be much better....if not they are in a bit of trouble.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I know the Redskins do not have the best record, but they have been playing teams tough. They just can't close them out. And they have the best secondary in the league. It was a bad match-up for the Saints. Coming off a win over the Patriots and going into a division game.

I think the Vikings showed that they are vulnerable outside. But they may not be outside in the Playoffs until they are in Miami.

Yeah this has always been a problem for them. They build their team on speed so when they get on grass they lose that advantage and struggle more often than not.

[phightin]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

So the Saints win a game the Redskins(3-9) handed to them, yet today clearly defines who is the team to beat in the NFC. Interesting rational.

The Vikings and Saints both have issues. Obviously giving up 450 yards to the Redskins says that your defense is capable of giving up yards to anyone.

More concerning with the Vikings is they lost their All Pro caliber Middle linebacker.

The Redskins have played a lot of good teams close this season and have one of the top defenses in the league so they're not as bad as espn likes to make them out to be. The difference between the Vikings and Saints is for how "great" the run stopping defense is it doesn't matter. Drew Brees is basically on the same level as Peyton was in his prime and more importantly is behind the best offense line in the league. With the additional weapons they have they're in a comfortable position to beat the Vikings at home. And my "interesting rational" tells me 12-0 is better than 10-2

[Erik W.]

Originally Posted by phightin

The Redskins have played a lot of good teams close this season and have one of the top defenses in the league so they're not as bad as espn likes to make them out to be.

They lost to Detroit, KC, and Carolina. Three completely terrible teams. They had a two point win over St. Louis, and a three point win over Tampa Bay.

They've played one of the softest schedules in the NFL and managed to go 2-3 against the five worst teams in the league.

Really, let's not make them into more than what they are. They're terrible.

[phightin]

Originally Posted by Erik W.

They lost to Detroit, KC, and Carolina. Three completely terrible teams. They had a two point win over St. Louis, and a three point win over Tampa Bay.

They've played one of the softest schedules in the NFL and managed to go 2-3 against the five worst teams in the league.

Really, let's not make them into more than what they are. They're terrible.

soft schedule? You take a look at the NFC East lately? or how they performed recently? or follow the nfl..at all? They beat Denver, then lost to Dallas, Philadelphia, and New Orleans the last 3 weeks all by 3 points or less. Plus if you look at their entire schedule they play 10 teams this season with a .500 and better record so far so they certainly do not have an easy schedule by any stretch.

They are bad and have under-performed sure but they aren't an automatic win by any means, and have been playing well recently.

[Erik W.]

Originally Posted by phightin

soft schedule? You take a look at the NFC East lately? or how they performed recently? or follow the nfl..at all?

Why are you even talking about the division? Forget the division. They lost to the Lions! Chiefs! Panthers! Terrible teams! What does losing to terrible teams make your team? Terrible!

These are professional athletes, not Pop Warner kids. There's no such thing as a moral victory. They're 3-9. They handed the Lions their first win in like 23 years. The Redskins are a terrible team. Stop propping them up just because they're in the same division as your own inconsistent (lost to Oakland! Ha!) team.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by phightin

The Redskins have played a lot of good teams close this season and have one of the top defenses in the league so they're not as bad as espn likes to make them out to be. The difference between the Vikings and Saints is for how "great" the run stopping defense is it doesn't matter. Drew Brees is basically on the same level as Peyton was in his prime and more importantly is behind the best offense line in the league. With the additional weapons they have they're in a comfortable position to beat the Vikings at home. And my "interesting rational" tells me 12-0 is better than 10-2

I think we seen yesterday and after the 07 Super Bowl that no team is as dominant as they may appear. The Saints have played exactly 3 teams with winning records this year and their oppenents have a staggering combined record of 56-88.(.389) You could put the Raiders up against that schedule and they'd have a shot at a winning record.

The Saints 3 big wins this year seemed big at the time but as time goes on seem less impressive

At Philly(this team seems good but I cant get the Oakland loss out of my head)
New York Giants(2-5 since starting 5-0)
New England Patriots(lost 3 out of last 4)

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think we seen yesterday and after the 07 Super Bowl that no team is as dominant as they may appear. The Saints have played exactly 3 teams with winning records this year and their oppenents have a staggering combined record of 56-88.(.389) You could put the Raiders up against that schedule and they'd have a shot at a winning record.

The Saints 3 big wins this year seemed big at the time but as time goes on seem less impressive

At Philly(this team seems good but I cant get the Oakland loss out of my head)
New York Giants(2-5 since starting 5-0)
New England Patriots(lost 3 out of last 4)

I think it's pretty common in pro leagues where even the most dominant team would look bad once in awhile. More often than not, great teams would lose here and there. I don't know what's so special about "after the 07 Super Bowl".

The Saints do have a slightly more difficult schedule than the Vikings so far, and they do have two more wins. Vikings' only impressive wins over good teams are both over Green Bay. Saints dominated in several games with teams better or on the same level with Green Bay.

[Ragnar]

There are an overwhelmingly large amount of crap teams in the NFL this season. But if I had to put money down, it would be on the Saints over the Vikings. They just look a bit better. But both teams have average D.

The first team from the NFC that can put together a defense will beat either of those two teams. A good D will always bring a great O down to earth.

Anyone have odds on an undefeated Super Bowl this year? That would sure give those old Dolphins players a headache.

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

A good D will always bring a great O down to earth.

An offense that cannot deal with a good defense wouldn't be called a great offense.

Study actually shows great offense is more likely to win championships than great defense.

Advanced NFL Stats: Does Defense Win Championships?

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Skipaway

I think it's pretty common in pro leagues where even the most dominant team would look bad once in awhile. More often than not, great teams would lose here and there. I don't know what's so special about "after the 07 Super Bowl".

The Saints do have a slightly more difficult schedule than the Vikings so far, and they do have two more wins. Vikings' only impressive wins over good teams are both over Green Bay. Saints dominated in several games with teams better or on the same level with Green Bay.

Patriots likely being the most dominant team in NFL history until losing the Super Bowl ring a bell?

Saints have played the 30th most difficult schedule while the Vikings have played the 31st most difficult schedule athough with the Vikings playing the Cards and the Saints playing the skins they may switch spots. So they've both played suckwads pretty much the whole year.

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Patriots likely being the most dominant team in NFL history until losing the Super Bowl ring a bell?

Saints have played the 30th most difficult schedule while the Vikings have played the 31st most difficult schedule athough with the Vikings playing the Cards and the Saints playing the skins they may switch spots. So they've both played suckwads pretty much the whole year.

And losing the Super Bowl means.....? It's really just one game. Great teams have a couple of loses a season all the time. Just the Patriots were unfortunate that it happened in the playoffs.

That's just what playoffs are, and the main reason I don't like playoffs in general. It's just a glorified short series of games where the hottest team among good teams win.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Skipaway

And losing the Super Bowl means.....? It's really just one game. Great teams have a couple of loses a season all the time. Just the Patriots were unfortunate that it happened in the playoffs.

That's just what playoffs are, and the main reason I don't like playoffs in general. It's just a glorified short series of games where the hottest team among good teams win.

I thought you were following along.

In short someone made mention that the Saints were the most dominant team of this year so I came back with the 07 Super Bowl to make the point that not all dominant teams win.

We are on the page so its surprising you are questioning it.

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I thought you were following along.

In short someone made mention that the Saints were the most dominant team of this year so I came back with the 07 Super Bowl to make the point that not all dominant teams win.

We are on the page so its surprising you are questioning it.

Well, that's not what you said. If you said that not all dominant teams win, I'd agree. You said "no team is as dominant as they may appear" though. I don't think that is the case. Some teams are more dominant than they appear, while some teams are not as dominant as they appear.

[gollum65]

I just got a good laugh reading the title of this thread. I don't even care what the OP was writing about. The NFL is a joke and the Vikes are the biggest clowns of all.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by gollum65

I just got a good laugh reading the title of this thread. I don't even care what the OP was writing about. The NFL is a joke and the Vikes are the biggest clowns of all.

So what exactly was the point of you coming into this thread? Trolling? Most people stay out of threads they have no interest in unless they want to cause trouble.

[phightin]

Originally Posted by Erik W.

Why are you even talking about the division? Forget the division. They lost to the Lions! Chiefs! Panthers! Terrible teams! What does losing to terrible teams make your team? Terrible!

These are professional athletes, not Pop Warner kids. There's no such thing as a moral victory. They're 3-9. They handed the Lions their first win in like 23 years. The Redskins are a terrible team. Stop propping them up just because they're in the same division as your own inconsistent (lost to Oakland! Ha!) team.

They lost to an oakland team that just went into pittsburgh and won and also beat the bengals a couple weeks ago so again I'll ask follow the NFL much? If you look at their overall schedule it's not a cake walk and again while they aren't a good team they certainly are not a crap team and slightly better then their record indicates.

As for the Eagles, they certainly are not elite, but at 8-4 tied for first in the first or second toughest division in the NFL certainly makes them a very good team despite what you may see in your uninformed view. They've lost this year to the hands down best team in the NFC the saints, under-performed and lost to a decent dallas team, oakland, and at san diego. If they were to end up losing 5 games this season considering their division the oakland game won't mean that much. Most teams end up losing to one subpar side throughout the year.