PDA

View Full Version : "Elite" teams, your top five


Pages : [1] 2

luee
08-07-2008, 12:34 PM
The defeat of the best team in history opens things up. I see five dominant teams that can easily compete for the title. In no order; Pats, Colts, Steelers, Giants, Cowboys. All with top QBs, solid OLs, defenses that can take-over and depth.

Splat
08-07-2008, 12:37 PM
1.NE
2.Indy
3.SD
4.Dallas
5.Pitt

Bigburt63
08-07-2008, 12:47 PM
1) NE
2) Indy
3) SD
4) Dallas
5) JAX

Addict
08-07-2008, 12:48 PM
1. Patriots
2. Colts
3. Chargers
4. Cowboys
5. Packers/Giants

MetSox17
08-07-2008, 12:51 PM
Teams with guys that have just one more TD pass in the NFL than i do are NOT elite.

1. Patriots
2. Cowboys
3. Chargers
4. Colts
5. Jacksonville

bored of education
08-07-2008, 01:00 PM
pats
chiefs
colts
dolphins
cowboys
chargers

Brent
08-07-2008, 01:03 PM
Teams with guys that have just one more TD pass in the NFL than i do are NOT elite.
Jordy Nelson makes any team elite!

D-Unit
08-07-2008, 01:08 PM
It took a while to get there, but I think Dallas is finally back into that category again. Woooohooo!

BigJohn98
08-07-2008, 01:11 PM
Pats
Colts
Cowboys
Jaguars
Chargers

yourfavestoner
08-07-2008, 01:13 PM
I don't want to be a hater, but I don't see pitt being an elite team this year. that offensive line would have me seriously worried.

wicket
08-07-2008, 01:13 PM
1: Pats
2: Chargers
3: Colts
4: Giants
5: Cowboys
HM: Saints Packers Jaguars and Browns

Bigburt63
08-07-2008, 01:15 PM
I don't want to be a hater, but I don't see pitt being an elite team this year. that offensive line would have me seriously worried.

Especially since they lsot Faneca, who may have not had his best year, but must have been better than who they had behind him

abaddon41_80
08-07-2008, 01:39 PM
1. Colts
2. Patriots
3. Cowboys
4. Chargers
5. Jaguars

princefielder28
08-07-2008, 01:44 PM
1. San Diego
2. Dallas
3. New England
4. Indianapolis

Those are the only elite teams in the NFL this season...if New Orleans meshes well then they may be able to move up

Burns336
08-07-2008, 01:45 PM
1. Chargers
2. Cowboys
3. Colts
4. Patriots
5. Jacksonville

Matthew Jones
08-07-2008, 01:50 PM
Patriots, Cowboys, Chargers, Colts, Steelers, I guess.

D-Unit
08-07-2008, 01:52 PM
1. NE Patriots
2. NY Giants
3. DAL Cowboys
4. GB Packers
5a. CLE Browns
5b. NY Jets
5c. PIT Steelers



SAN Chargers - Look like Tarazan, play like Jane.

Bills2083
08-07-2008, 01:54 PM
1. Patriots
2. Colts
3. Cowboys
4. Giants
5. Jaguars

cdub11
08-07-2008, 01:59 PM
pats, cowboys, colts, chargers, and jags

Gay Ork Wang
08-07-2008, 01:59 PM
1. Chargers
2. Colts
3. Pats
4. Dallas
5. Steelers

Shiver
08-07-2008, 02:13 PM
1. New England
Reason: Duh.

2. San Diego
Reason: I think Philip Rivers and Vincent Jackson showed us what they could do in the near future, plus LaDainian Tomlinson still has a few years of elite play left.

3. Indianapolis
Reason: As long as they have Peyton Manning they will be an elite team.

4. New York (N)
Reason: The defense looks like it will still be very good. I like the fact that players like Steve Smith and Kevin Boss will only grow into the offense and provided secondary options in the passing game.

5. Jacksonville
Reason: One of these years the Jaguars will surpass the Colts, but since I have unsuccessfully predicted it up to this point I will go the opposite way and maybe that will change things.

And I do not have either the Packers or Cowboys making the playoffs this year, let alone elite teams, which sets me apart I guess.

21ST
08-07-2008, 02:25 PM
I dont even think there are 5 dominant teams in the NFL but if i had to pick some i would pick New England and Indy maybe the Dallas. The giants still dont impress me

PoopSandwich
08-07-2008, 02:33 PM
Top 5 teams in my opinion entering this season are.

1. New England

2. Indy

3. San Diego

4. Dallas

5. Cleveland

Not trying to be a homer with the Cleveland pick but I see no reason why the Browns shouldn't finish way up there this year besides DA messing up or injuries.

princefielder28
08-07-2008, 02:37 PM
Top 5 teams in my opinion entering this season are.

1. New England

2. Indy

3. San Diego

4. Dallas

5. Cleveland

Not trying to be a homer with the Cleveland pick but I see no reason why the Browns shouldn't finish way up there this year besides DA messing up or injuries.

Don't worry, you're not being a homer at all. (cough) Maybe if it was a Top 10 list we could have Cleveland on here, but Top 5, are you serious?

Shiver
08-07-2008, 02:37 PM
Derek Anderson struggled mightily in the last half of the season, I wouldn't trust him.

CC.SD
08-07-2008, 02:37 PM
1. Chargers
2. Pats
3. Colts


and those are your elite teams. Suck it if you've got a problem with the order, the Pats don't have a secondary and the Bolts roxxorz the Colts.

TACKLE
08-07-2008, 02:40 PM
1. Patriots
2. Cowboys
3. Chargers
4. New Orleans
5. Indy

Geo
08-07-2008, 02:42 PM
So you put all the emphasis in the Chargers' flukey winning streak against the Colts, and yet completely disregard the Pats definitively beating the Chargers in the last three games. Okay. :D

CC.SD
08-07-2008, 02:45 PM
So you put all the emphasis in the Chargers' flukey winning streak against the Colts, and yet completely disregard the Pats definitively beating the Chargers in the last three games. Okay. :D

Nope, I just think the Patriots have lost a huge playmaker in the secondary, after playing us close these last three times (or maybe just in the playoffs, twice). I also think without serious injuries to our three best players, we would have coasted to a win against NE in the playoffs. That legendary offense only put up 21 against us.

Geo
08-07-2008, 02:50 PM
21-12. 38-14. 24-21. Nevermind that the Chargers don't have a wideout as good as Samuel for him to shut down, they aren't lighting up the Patriots anyways and couldn't even get past two touchdowns against the oldest Patriots defense yet this season.

The Colts will take advantage of the Patriots' secondary, they have the talent and the offense. I think the Chargers could too with a good game, but I'm not going to give it to them.

CC.SD
08-07-2008, 02:56 PM
So you put all the emphasis in the Chargers' flukey winning streak against the Colts, and yet completely disregard the Pats definitively beating the Chargers in the last three games. Okay. :D

Also, sorry Geo but I have a real problem with your tone in this post...it comes off bitter and you're better than that, and I know it from all your other posts. Anyone watching the 2006 playoff game between the Chargers and Pats could see the Bolts self-destructed. Muffed punts, dropped passes, horrific penalties all over the place. and in 2007 the Chargers simply weren't at full strength. Even that game was 12-14 well into the 4th quarter. I don't know how you call those "definitive" wins while dismissing how the Bolts beat the Colts. It's two sides of the same coin.

I'll give you the 2007 regular season, but at the same time I know from having this conversation before that somehow you can't give any credit to a Bolt defense that got its hands on 6 picks and ultimately, played well enough to make the game come down to a kick that got missed. Believe me, as a Charger fan, I know that kicks that look easy can get missed. If you play well enough during the game, it doesn't come down to that.


Anyway, my list is a reflection of how I view the order in 2008, and I don't have any reason to change it til 2008 is well under way.

CC.SD
08-07-2008, 02:58 PM
21-12. 38-14. 24-21. Nevermind that the Chargers don't have a wideout as good as Samuel for him to shut down, they aren't lighting up the Patriots anyways and couldn't even get past two touchdowns against the oldest Patriots defense yet this season.

The Colts will take advantage of the Patriots' secondary, they have the talent and the offense. I think the Chargers could too with a good game, but I'm not going to give it to them.

So you're saying Chambers+Jackson+Gates+LT<Hobbs, Meriweather, a couple rookies and what's left of Rodney Harrison? Come on man, I'm okay with bias but that's just not realistic.

bored of education
08-07-2008, 03:00 PM
So you're saying Chambers+Jackson+Gates+LT<Hobbs, Meriweather, a couple rookies and what's left of Rodney Harrison? Come on man, I'm okay with bias but that's just not realistic.

I was about to say something along that lines. Who do the Pats have in the secondary?? Hobbs is not much more than a decent number 2 CB. Harrison is old, and some other bums.

cdub11
08-07-2008, 03:18 PM
1. New England
Reason: Duh.

2. San Diego
Reason: I think Philip Rivers and Vincent Jackson showed us what they could do in the near future, plus LaDainian Tomlinson still has a few years of elite play left.

3. Indianapolis
Reason: As long as they have Peyton Manning they will be an elite team.

4. New York (N)
Reason: The defense looks like it will still be very good. I like the fact that players like Steve Smith and Kevin Boss will only grow into the offense and provided secondary options in the passing game.

5. Jacksonville
Reason: One of these years the Jaguars will surpass the Colts, but since I have unsuccessfully predicted it up to this point I will go the opposite way and maybe that will change things.

And I do not have either the Packers or Cowboys making the playoffs this year, let alone elite teams, which sets me apart I guess.

why do you think the cowboys wont make the playoffs?

Burns336
08-07-2008, 03:21 PM
Like I've been saying -- Half the pat defense if going to be in a wheel chair and the other half hasn't taken the diapers off.

The D-line is great and all seem to be in the peak of their careers, but the LB's and DB's are looking shaky.

That's why I have them below Indy and SD in the AFC barring injuries or setbacks to LT/Gates & Manning/Wayne

CC.SD
08-07-2008, 03:23 PM
why do you think the cowboys wont make the playoffs?

It's not impossible to fathom: if you like New York or the Eagles to win the NFC East, which could easily happen based on matchups/strength of schedule/how the season shakes out, then they'd have to get a wildcard, where they'd be competing with Minny/Green Bay AND Tampa/New Orleans. Plus you never know how Carolina or Chicago could turn out. There are no guarantees.

Burns336
08-07-2008, 03:24 PM
why do you think the cowboys wont make the playoffs?

Haters gotta hate. He has no logical reason.

This is actually the first year I feel confident about our team since the triplets. I knew we couldn't hang with NE last year with the secondary we had. NYG matched up with them much better because of the pass rush.

Better pass rush, better secondary, and better offense for us this year should translate into a playoff win or 3.

Burns336
08-07-2008, 03:27 PM
It's not impossible to fathom: if you like New York or the Eagles to win the NFC East, which could easily happen based on matchups/strength of schedule/how the season shakes out, then they'd have to get a wildcard, where they'd be competing with Minny/Green Bay AND Tampa/New Orleans. Plus you never know how Carolina or Chicago could turn out. There are no guarantees.

You could say the same about SD, considering our "strength of schedule" doesn't really mean anything within our own division when NY, Philly, and Wash play most of the same teams as us. Plus GB is weak. Rodgers sucks. Anyone who thinks otherwise is about to get a wake up call when Check down boy gets figured out after 2 games.

Edit: We've improved or stayed the same in every aspect of the team. We lost no one of concern and added a bunch of key players. I see no way we miss the playoffs. Last years team plus Zach Thomas, Mike Jenkins, Felix Jones, Pacman Jones, and all of the young players expected to get significant time this year, Plus team not getting full of their own **** like they did last year = Major upgrade.

bantx
08-07-2008, 03:38 PM
21-12. 38-14. 24-21. Nevermind that the Chargers don't have a wideout as good as Samuel for him to shut down, they aren't lighting up the Patriots anyways and couldn't even get past two touchdowns against the oldest Patriots defense yet this season.

The Colts will take advantage of the Patriots' secondary, they have the talent and the offense. I think the Chargers could too with a good game, but I'm not going to give it to them.

Did u even watch the playoff game against the pats? The defense gave the chargesr so many chances to score but they came up with about 3-4 field goals and that was a game with no LT and no Gates, yes they struggled at the beginning of the season but they did pick things up making the AFC champion game, calling their year a fluke is just dumb cause u obviously didnt watch one game of the chargers all year and u just looked up the past scores of the pats vs chargers game.

Geo
08-07-2008, 03:40 PM
Both NFC wild card spots will go to the East again I think, and I would definitely expect Dallas to be in as one of those three teams. Once in however, anything can happen given familiarity between the Cowboys/Eagles/Giants. Familiarity keeps games close and a bounce or two can decide a game.

Geo
08-07-2008, 03:44 PM
Did u even watch the playoff game against the pats? The defense gave the chargesr so many chances to score but they came up with about 3-4 field goals and that was a game with no LT and no Gates, yes they struggled at the beginning of the season but they did pick things up making the AFC champion game, calling their year a fluke is just dumb cause u obviously didnt watch one game of the chargers all year and u just looked up the past scores of the pats vs chargers game.
That's called red zone defense, get a clue. Belichick's Patriots have continually fielded among the best bend-but-don't-break defenses. And Belichick has proven he can successfully gameplan against Phillip Rivers.

Let's get something straight, I think the Chargers can bounce the Patriots out of the playoffs. And get to the Super Bowl, they have the potential. I haven't even said if they should or shouldn't be ranked ahead of the Patrots, I was pointing to CC's "logic" earler.

DiG
08-07-2008, 03:44 PM
It took a while to get there, but I think Dallas is finally back into that category again. Woooohooo!

your a redskins fan now d unit. no cheering for cowboys.

DiG
08-07-2008, 03:46 PM
Both NFC wild card spots will go to the East again I think, and I would definitely expect Dallas to be in as one of those three teams. Once in however, anything can happen given familiarity between the Cowboys/Eagles/Giants. Familiarity keeps games close and a bounce or two can decide a game.

you didnt include the skins? playoffs last year and returning all starters? healthy oline finally? hmmm

Burns336
08-07-2008, 03:47 PM
Both NFC wild card spots will go to the East again I think, and I would definitely expect Dallas to be in as one of those three teams. Once in however, anything can happen given familiarity between the Cowboys/Eagles/Giants. Familiarity keeps games close and a bounce or two can decide a game.

Familiarity is huge. I would definitely agree with that. Every NFC east divisional game is a tough one.

GB12
08-07-2008, 03:49 PM
You could say the same about SD, considering our "strength of schedule" doesn't really mean anything within our own division when NY, Philly, and Wash play most of the same teams as us. Plus GB is weak. Rodgers sucks. Anyone who thinks otherwise is about to get a wake up call when Check down boy gets figured out after 2 games.
How is Green Bay weak?

And as for Rodgers you can't say he sucks anymore than someone can say he's great.

Geo
08-07-2008, 03:50 PM
I picked the Redskins to make the playoffs last summer, and was right, but I don't think they get back this season. Philly will, imo. But the Redskins offense under Zorn is going to really develop, maybe not to full effect this year, but could take off next season with a healthier defense to be a very potent team. How much Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly contribute this season will be key, right now it's not looking too good for the rookies given their health issues which can hinder their chance for development.

Dam8610
08-07-2008, 03:50 PM
Colts
Patriots
Chargers













Cowboys?
Jaguars?

It's not really elite five...

619
08-07-2008, 04:03 PM
I agree no elite 5 at this point ..

1. New England

2. Indianapolis

3. San Diego


NYG, Dallas & Jacksonville on outside looking in while Pittsburgh deserves no mention in this 'elite' debate .

Menardo75
08-07-2008, 04:10 PM
why do you think the cowboys wont make the playoffs?

Well they won't win a championship unless they get a QB

vidae
08-07-2008, 04:24 PM
The Panthers are far from elite but I think they make a big jump back to respectability this year with a healthy Delhomme, Stewart/Williams one-two punch and Otah at RT.

Of course, they don't have Smith for the first two games of the season, but.. I like their chances.

I guess the only "elite" teams are the Pats, Colts, Chargers and Cowboys. I'm adding the Cowboys because their offense was pretty damn good and will probably be a little better with Felix Jones and Barber in that backfield.

thule
08-07-2008, 04:25 PM
1. New England
Reason: Duh.

2. San Diego
Reason: I think Philip Rivers and Vincent Jackson showed us what they could do in the near future, plus LaDainian Tomlinson still has a few years of elite play left.

3. Indianapolis
Reason: As long as they have Peyton Manning they will be an elite team.

4. New York (N)
Reason: The defense looks like it will still be very good. I like the fact that players like Steve Smith and Kevin Boss will only grow into the offense and provided secondary options in the passing game.

5. Jacksonville
Reason: One of these years the Jaguars will surpass the Colts, but since I have unsuccessfully predicted it up to this point I will go the opposite way and maybe that will change things.

And I do not have either the Packers or Cowboys making the playoffs this year, let alone elite teams, which sets me apart I guess.

Shiver I respect what you say...but have you been out of the game too long?

Obviously as a Cowboys fan I have some bias to my team...but not making the playoffs is a foolish statement...and I'm going to come knocking on your door come playoff time with a big old plate of crow.

The cowboys ended the season with quite a few decisions.

Free Agents
Patrick Crayton - Resigned
Julius Jones - Seattle
Ken Hamlin - Resigned
Flozell Adams - Resigned
Jacques Reeves - Houston
Marion Barber - Resigned
Chris Canty - 1 year Tender
Jay Ratliff - Resigned

Additions
Zach Thomas
Adam Jones
Felix Jones
Mike Jenkins
Martellus Bennett
Tashard Choice
Orlando Scandrick

Departures
Akin Ayodele
Anthony Fasano

Now are you going to try to tell me that a team that went 13-3...and resigned 6 out of 8 free agents...drafted to strengthen weak area's...and brought in two Free Agents with Pro Bowl experience is going to not even make the playoffs!

I'm sorry but unless Romo gets hurt you can book a playoff experience for the cowboys...and it doesn't make a lot of sense to base ur prediction on a starting QB going down...since almost any top team that lost their signal caller would be in trouble.

Just to add to the numbers here.
Felix Jones and Tashard Choice = Julius Jones
Zach Thomas > Akin Ayodele
Adam Jones and Mike Jenkins > Reeves
Tony Curtis and Martellus Bennett = Anthony Fasano

So when your looking at a team...I think to predict a decline in play or record...it would atleast have to be backed up by facts.

Fact is Tony Romo has only started 26 games
Fact is Marion Barber is now a starter
Fact is Roy Williams is no longer on the field in Nickel/Dime situations
Fact is Jason Garrett and Brian Stewart are in their second years in the same system

I can't see one reason to predict a decline other than just trying to be "that guy"

CJSchneider
08-07-2008, 04:27 PM
1. Cowboys / Chargers

3. Saints
4. Patriots
5.Colts


I'd love to put the Saints at #2 and bring the Chargers down, however, for as big a Saints fan as I am, they have yet to prove themselves. So far, in all honesty, it's just a great team on paper.

CC.SD
08-07-2008, 05:14 PM
You could say the same about SD, considering our "strength of schedule" doesn't really mean anything within our own division when NY, Philly, and Wash play most of the same teams as us. Plus GB is weak. Rodgers sucks. Anyone who thinks otherwise is about to get a wake up call when Check down boy gets figured out after 2 games.

Edit: We've improved or stayed the same in every aspect of the team. We lost no one of concern and added a bunch of key players. I see no way we miss the playoffs. Last years team plus Zach Thomas, Mike Jenkins, Felix Jones, Pacman Jones, and all of the young players expected to get significant time this year, Plus team not getting full of their own **** like they did last year = Major upgrade.

Easy bucko, I didn't say I agreed with him. Although I don't think you could say the same about SD, they don't have anywhere near the inter-divisional competition Dallas does.

As it stands right now, Dallas is a team that got upended by a wildcard from their own division in their first playoff game. They haven't won a playoff game in over a decade. That alone might be enough for a DQ from "elite" status. I still think they'll be in the tournament though.

Burns336
08-07-2008, 05:28 PM
Easy bucko, I didn't say I agreed with him. Although I don't think you could say the same about SD, they don't have anywhere near the inter-divisional competition Dallas does.

As it stands right now, Dallas is a team that got upended by a wildcard from their own division in their first playoff game. They haven't won a playoff game in over a decade. That alone might be enough for a DQ from "elite" status. I still think they'll be in the tournament though.

What does having won a playoff game in the past decade have to do with anything? I mean seriously. To that same token, you have never won a Super bowl ever. Does this hold some relevance when evaluating the upcoming charger season? No, not at all.

So please drop the trash argument.

and we got upended by the Giants, but they somehow managed to beat the team that upended you, so what is your point?

New season. Better team. Playoffs are a lock.

bantx
08-07-2008, 05:33 PM
1. NE Patriots
2. NY Giants
3. DAL Cowboys
4. GB Packers
5a. CLE Browns
5b. NY Jets
5c. PIT Steelers



SAN Chargers - Look like Tarazan, play like Jane.

Again did u actually watch any chargers game? or are u just like basically just assuming like everyone else has been, yeah they played their way to the AFC Championship game playing like jane

Gay Ork Wang
08-07-2008, 05:43 PM
Why do people make these threads? I mean they always become homer battles

Unbiased
08-07-2008, 05:46 PM
1. Patriots
2. Colts
3. Giants
4. Chargers
5. Jaguars

Unbiased
08-07-2008, 05:50 PM
1. Cowboys / Chargers

3. Saints
4. Patriots
5.Colts


I'd love to put the Saints at #2 and bring the Chargers down, however, for as big a Saints fan as I am, they have yet to prove themselves. So far, in all honesty, it's just a great team on paper.

Yet you criticized someone for not having the Saints at #32 in their mock draft.

MetSox17
08-07-2008, 05:52 PM
I'm sorry, but Cleveland belongs no where near the top five. It's okay to try to be cool and different, and stand out with your opinions, but Cleveland is no where near being a top five team.

The Packers are no longer in the discussion, seeing as they will go 16 games this year without a proven quarterback. If Grant proves he wasn't a fluke, then they might win 10 games, but that hardly gets you into the top five.

The team that a lot of people are forgetting, to throw in the Clevelands of the world are the Jaguars. Their running game is one of the best, their offensive line is very good, quarterback play is solid, and WR's are decent enough to get them by. Everyone knows they have a tough defense. Their added pass rush should improve them even more, and in my opinion, they're easily a top five team. Especially when teams like the Browns are being mentioned..

Staubach12
08-07-2008, 06:59 PM
1. New England
2. San Diego
3. Dallas
4. Indianapolis
5. Packers OR Steelers

CC.SD
08-07-2008, 07:13 PM
What does having won a playoff game in the past decade have to do with anything? I mean seriously. To that same token, you have never won a Super bowl ever. Does this hold some relevance when evaluating the upcoming charger season? No, not at all.

So please drop the trash argument.

and we got upended by the Giants, but they somehow managed to beat the team that upended you, so what is your point?

New season. Better team. Playoffs are a lock.

God I'm so sick of super-sensitive people on the internet. Maybe I'm being hypocritical, but seriously lighten up and grow up. I even said I thought the Cowboys would make the playoffs.

D-Unit
08-07-2008, 08:03 PM
Again did u actually watch any chargers game? or are u just like basically just assuming like everyone else has been, yeah they played their way to the AFC Championship game playing like jane
The AFC West was the weakest division in football. Not like they had to climb a mountain to get there.

Eaglez.Fan
08-07-2008, 08:06 PM
I'll go with-

1. New England
2. San Diego
3. Indy
4. Dallas
5. Green Bay

ALD
08-07-2008, 08:17 PM
Indy, NE, Jacksonville, NYG and Dallas, even though I think Wade Phillips will prevent the cowboys from winning a playoff game, again.

CC.SD
08-07-2008, 08:25 PM
The AFC West was the weakest division in football. Not like they had to climb a mountain to get there.

What does the division have to do with winning two playoff games and coming close against a 17-0 team, minus your best players?

ALD
08-07-2008, 08:27 PM
wow not many people believing in the Giants. i know we lost strahan and Shock, but I don't think those guys will be missed as badly as I guess you guys do. We really mis-used shockey last year so unless Boss can't block at all I don't see much less productivity from teh TE spot. Plus our running game will be better with Bradshaw being a big part from day one, same for the passing game with Smith. Oline has more depth this season, eli really took hold and stopped forcing things last season and our D should be even better. We actually have a safety who can cover now, not to mention much better corners to start the season.

bantx
08-07-2008, 08:28 PM
no one is doubting the giants theyre just not elite

RoyHall#1
08-07-2008, 08:44 PM
I'm sorry, but Cleveland belongs no where near the top five. It's okay to try to be cool and different, and stand out with your opinions, but Cleveland is no where near being a top five team.

The Packers are no longer in the discussion, seeing as they will go 16 games this year without a proven quarterback. If Grant proves he wasn't a fluke, then they might win 10 games, but that hardly gets you into the top five.

The team that a lot of people are forgetting, to throw in the Clevelands of the world are the Jaguars. Their running game is one of the best, their offensive line is very good, quarterback play is solid, and WR's are decent enough to get them by. Everyone knows they have a tough defense. Their added pass rush should improve them even more, and in my opinion, they're easily a top five team. Especially when teams like the Browns are being mentioned..


What's so awful about the Brown's being mentioned? There's a few big if's at QB and on defense, but we definitely have the talent to be an elite team this year. Just because the Browns have been terrible ever since we came back into the league up until last year, you don't think they deserve to be mentioned with the other big dogs of the AFC? Our defense is going to surprise a lot of people if we can get at least OK play from our line, because last year it sucked because of the line. I for one think Rogers and Williams are going to help not just the line, but our whole defense immensely.

MetSox17
08-07-2008, 08:48 PM
What's so awful about the Brown's being mentioned? There's a few big if's at QB and on defense, but we definitely have the talent to be an elite team this year. Just because the Browns have been terrible ever since we came back into the league up until last year, you don't think they deserve to be mentioned with the other big dogs of the AFC? Our defense is going to surprise a lot of people if we can get at least OK play from our line, because last year it sucked because of the line. I for one think Rogers and Williams are going to help not just the line, but our whole defense immensely.

"There's a few big if's at QB.."

A top five team hardly has "big if's", much less at the quarterback position.

The defensive line should be improved, but you still need DB's, and didn't you just trade your most decent CB this off-season? Sean Jones is very solid at one safety spot, but who's gonna play the other one? Brodney Pool? I don't like their defense one bit, and every other team being mentioned in the top five is good to very good in almost every facet of their team.

The only team in the top five with a glaring weakness somewhere is the Patriots and their secondary, but their offense and pass rush should be enough to get them by again, into the conference title game.

bantx
08-07-2008, 08:54 PM
The AFC West was the weakest division in football. Not like they had to climb a mountain to get there.

yeah the playoffs isnt the afc west and we played like jane when made payton manning look like a rookie

StrongSide97
08-07-2008, 08:55 PM
1. New England Patriots
2. San Diego Chargers
3. Dallas Cowboys
4. Pittsburgh Steelers
5. Jacksonville Jaguars

I really don't feel comfortable putting Jacksonville at five, but I don't feel right putting anyone else there either...that's my elite four!

yo123
08-07-2008, 08:57 PM
yeah the playoffs isnt the afc west and we played like jane when made payton manning look like a rookie


You guys have had all the hype for about 5 offseasons now, and you haven't made a Super Bowl yet. I'll believe it when I see it.

bantx
08-07-2008, 09:27 PM
You guys have had all the hype for about 5 offseasons now, and you haven't made a Super Bowl yet. I'll believe it when I see it.

so ur not saying the chargers arent an elite team until they make the superbowl?

RoyHall#1
08-07-2008, 09:33 PM
"There's a few big if's at QB.."

A top five team hardly has "big if's", much less at the quarterback position.

The defensive line should be improved, but you still need DB's, and didn't you just trade your most decent CB this off-season? Sean Jones is very solid at one safety spot, but who's gonna play the other one? Brodney Pool? I don't like their defense one bit, and every other team being mentioned in the top five is good to very good in almost every facet of their team.

The only team in the top five with a glaring weakness somewhere is the Patriots and their secondary, but their offense and pass rush should be enough to get them by again, into the conference title game.

Bodden would be good but he's always injured, and was last year as well. Our starting DB tandem should be pretty good, depth is lacking but our CB's definitely aren't going to be the problem on D for us barring injury. As you said, Jones is a beast, and Pool is decent and improving each year. I don't see how you can't like our D "one bit" with the additions this offseason as well as guys like Sean Jones, Eric Wright, and Kamerion Wimbley on it.

I shouldn't call QB a big if, but the play of DA will decide if we are an elite team or not IMO. And with the rest of the offense around him it will be hard for him to suck too badly. This is only his second year as a starter so he's sure to be improving. And look what he did last year. I'd probably have the Browns at 6 or 7 right now but the top 5 is right there.

Bengalsrocket
08-07-2008, 09:47 PM
Bodden would be good but he's always injured, and was last year as well. Our starting DB tandem should be pretty good, depth is lacking but our CB's definitely aren't going to be the problem on D for us barring injury. As you said, Jones is a beast, and Pool is decent and improving each year. I don't see how you can't like our D "one bit" with the additions this offseason as well as guys like Sean Jones, Eric Wright, and Kamerion Wimbley on it.

I shouldn't call QB a big if, but the play of DA will decide if we are an elite team or not IMO. And with the rest of the offense around him it will be hard for him to suck too badly. This is only his second year as a starter so he's sure to be improving. And look what he did last year. I'd probably have the Browns at 6 or 7 right now but the top 5 is right there.

I kind of thought Elite team sort of meant a lock to go the play offs for the next 3-4 years :(.

Regardless, the browns aren't even a lock to go the play offs this year. I'm not going to argue about the Bengals because it will just be considered homerism, and I'll leave the Ravens out because they have more questions than answers despite being a very powerful team.

However, the AFC North's schedule is incredibly tough, most people predict a team winning it with 10 wins at most, someome people even feel it might come down to 9 wins. With that in mind, how can you think the browns are lock over the steelers? They have a better D, and a reliable offense.

To be elite, I think you need to do more than post a winning record - like make the play offs.

MetSox17
08-07-2008, 09:47 PM
Bodden would be good but he's always injured, and was last year as well. Our starting DB tandem should be pretty good, depth is lacking but our CB's definitely aren't going to be the problem on D for us barring injury. As you said, Jones is a beast, and Pool is decent and improving each year. I don't see how you can't like our D "one bit" with the additions this offseason as well as guys like Sean Jones, Eric Wright, and Kamerion Wimbley on it.

I shouldn't call QB a big if, but the play of DA will decide if we are an elite team or not IMO. And with the rest of the offense around him it will be hard for him to suck too badly. This is only his second year as a starter so he's sure to be improving. And look what he did last year. I'd probably have the Browns at 6 or 7 right now but the top 5 is right there.

Is your secondary talented? Yes. Will it produce to according to the level of its talent? Who knows.

Kam Wimbley on one side is very good, and i was actually pretty envious of the Browns, having wanting to have him on my team opposite Ware, but who's on the other side? Jackson is good inside, but who's the other MLB? Rogers and Williams, if they play with motivation will be a great help to the line, but who's gonna lock down the other side of the line?

Derek Anderson went 53% from the field with 10 picks (as opposed to 9 td's) after week 10. As a whole, he had a very good year, but i wouldn't have my hopes too high for him to come in and light it up this year.

Outside of the top five i mentioned, it's hard to even make the argument that they're better than the Steelers, Packers, Vikings, Giants, Bucs and Seahawks, so yes, in my opinion, having them in the top five is a HUGE stretch.

RoyHall#1
08-07-2008, 10:06 PM
The other MLB will either be Leon WIlliams or Beau Bell, they won't be great, but serviceable. There's some question marks like I said, but I feel like these will be answered with flying colors for the first time since we've been back in the league. I think we're talented enough to either win the Super Bowl, or we could as Bengals said, easily miss the playoffs thanks to a tough schedule. I'm not going to argue this any more as I'll only sound more and more like a homer, but last year we had to win 9 out of our 10 games in shootouts basically. That's how well our offense played. This year I think with our defensive improvement we'll win some of the games we won in shootouts this year handily, but also keep it close in the tougher games and win some thanks to a high-scoring offense.

And we have a Josh Cribbs, which none of the other top teams are close to having.

MetSox17
08-07-2008, 10:26 PM
The other MLB will either be Leon WIlliams or Beau Bell, they won't be great, but serviceable. There's some question marks like I said, but I feel like these will be answered with flying colors for the first time since we've been back in the league. I think we're talented enough to either win the Super Bowl, or we could as Bengals said, easily miss the playoffs thanks to a tough schedule. I'm not going to argue this any more as I'll only sound more and more like a homer, but last year we had to win 9 out of our 10 games in shootouts basically. That's how well our offense played. This year I think with our defensive improvement we'll win some of the games we won in shootouts this year handily, but also keep it close in the tougher games and win some thanks to a high-scoring offense.

And we have a Josh Cribbs, which none of the other top teams are close to having.

If the down-the-stretch play of Derek Anderson is any indication of what you'll see from him this year, i wouldn't get my hopes too high on the Browns sniffing a Superbowl.

Josh Cribbs is huge, that i'll give you, but still, when ranking the teams as a whole, it's hard to argue they're better than any of the teams i listed previously, so i don't know how you can make the case that they're top five.

CJSchneider
08-07-2008, 11:37 PM
Yet you criticized someone for not having the Saints at #32 in their mock draft.

No I didn't. I may have said something about them being too low when placed at 21. think about it, according to what I have for my 5 elite, NO would be 30th - a far cry from 21.

Malaka
08-07-2008, 11:43 PM
My Top 5

1. Patriots- They won't be as dominant as last year, with a weak secondary, and their is almost no way they repeat the offensive performance. Either way they went 16-0, and they won't go down by much. Merriweather can emerge as a great player, and I heard they may start him at times at Corner. The offense is all the same except for Stallworth but he barely even began to play near the end of the season, Jabar Gaffney and Chad Jackson will emerge as solid targets, and Moss and Welker will continue to do what they do.

2. Chargers- They have all the pieces, they are more used to Norv Turner as coach. They have great corners, with Chro and Jammer, and even rookie Antoine Cason has great potential. If Phillip Rivers steps up and LT, and Gates come back healthy, and does very good them in the Super Bowl is very likely. Shawne Merriman should continue to do well, and Luis Castillo will continue to do what he does best.

3. Colts- They have Dwight Freeney and Marvin Harrison back. Last year, the Colts gave the Pats a run for their money without Freeney or Harrison, I am one of those people who believe if they had them, they would have one. Peyton Manning will be Peyton Manning, Bob Sanders will be 100% healthy, and Anthony Gonzalez will step up as the slot receiver, and will be way better than Stokley when he was there. They will also bring back back the Dominic Rhodes Joseph Addai tandem thay brought them to the Super Bowl.

4. Cowboys- The Cowboys are a very good team, but I don't think they are even much better than the Giants. It is some homerism and some sense combined but they are ahead because they are better than NYG but only by a little. Romo, will continue to improve, but if T.O gets injured the Cowboys are royally screwed because Patrick Crayton is an inconsistent #2, lets not talk #1. Marion Barber will not disappoint in his first year starting, and Felix Jones will do fine being the lighting to Barber's thunder. I don't think Zach Thomas will play much, and Pacman won't do too much, but Newman and Ware should continue their dominance in what they do.

5. Giants- The Giants were I believe if I remember right, the third youngest team last year, and they won the Super Bowl. This year Eli has some confidence, and will probably be way more consistent this year, not to say he will have MVP numbers but along the lines of 27 - 16 around that. The triple threat running game will not slow down, but now we know we had a draft day steal from the 7th round with Ahmad Bradshaw and should be used to complement Jacobs way more. Plaxico healthy will help Eli, and Toomer maybe slowing down a little, but Steve Smith will be healthy for the season and might eventually during the season take his spot as the #2. Even without Shockey we won the Super Bowl, so I don't think him leaving will hurt much. Without Strahan, we can't use Tuck as a DT, but that is fine, if anything we might move Kiwi back to DE and keep Tuck at DT, our pass rush will not be down much because I can see Kiwi, Tuck, and Osi only improving. Our secondary is much better than last year, with an improving Aaron Ross, and a much better coverage Safety than Gibril Wilson with Kenny Phillips, and Corey Webster might finally be a solid #2 corner.

Mr. Stiller
08-08-2008, 12:03 AM
Especially since they lsot Faneca, who may have not had his best year, but must have been better than who they had behind him

Chris Kemoeatu. He could've easily started last year. He's not as agile as faneca.. but he's a better straight ahead blocker and way better in pass protection.

I'll respectfully disagree with the Pitt is not elite mantra.

We have won 10 or so of the last 15 AFC Central/North titles. Not to mention we have had what.. 2 losing seasons in the past 20 years?

We're contenders every year. If San Diego can be considered Elite... I don't see Why Pitt isn't..

More established QB, Better depth at every position sans OL.. and the defenses are pretty comparable.

Dam8610
08-08-2008, 12:32 AM
No I didn't. I may have said something about them being too low when placed at 21. think about it, according to what I have for my 5 elite, NO would be 30th - a far cry from 21.

You, sir, are FAR too high on the Saints. Do they have talent at the skill positions on offense? Yes. What besides that do they have to be considered a contender? They have solid DEs, a talented but completely unproven UT, an unproven LB corps outside of its MLB, who has shown that he only plays well in a system the Saints are not running, and a secondary that gets burnt more than toast in a bad toaster. I don't see their poor back 7 giving them enough to contend for a championship.

SaintsMan
08-08-2008, 02:14 AM
MLB, who has shown that he only plays well in a system the Saints are not running

Hmm, I guess Vilma was lying when he said he was glad to be back in a system that plays to his strengths with the Saints.

Dam8610
08-08-2008, 02:21 AM
Hmm, I guess Vilma was lying when he said he was glad to be back in a system that plays to his strengths with the Saints.

When did the Saints start running the Tampa 2? I mean, I know they have the personnel for it, but they've never indicated they'll be running it.

SaintsMan
08-08-2008, 02:29 AM
When did the Saints start running the Tampa 2? I mean, I know they have the personnel for it, but they've never indicated they'll be running it.

Payton said we are going to run a lot more zone defense this season. And Vilma said this defense is very similar to the one he was in with NY when they ran the 4-3. You are the first person to say he doesn't fit.

Boston
08-08-2008, 02:39 AM
You could say the same about SD, considering our "strength of schedule" doesn't really mean anything within our own division when NY, Philly, and Wash play most of the same teams as us. Plus GB is weak. Rodgers sucks. Anyone who thinks otherwise is about to get a wake up call when Check down boy gets figured out after 2 games.

Edit: We've improved or stayed the same in every aspect of the team. We lost no one of concern and added a bunch of key players. I see no way we miss the playoffs. Last years team plus Zach Thomas, Mike Jenkins, Felix Jones, Pacman Jones, and all of the young players expected to get significant time this year, Plus team not getting full of their own **** like they did last year = Major upgrade.

I love how the only team Rodgers has had significant playing time against was the Cowboys, and he almost won the game for us...but yeah, I completely agree, he's going to be horrible this year...

DMWSackMachine
08-08-2008, 03:53 AM
Not to come across to homeric here...but Dallas should be at the top of every poster's list. Judging by the sentiments expressed here, people are going to get a fairly big wakeup call this year.

I know that, coming from a fan of the team, that it is hard to credit, but this team is as loaded with football talent as any team I have ever seen. They are incredibly deep and talented at every single position. They have an unbelievable stable of CBs, unlike any I've ever seen or even heard of, and they were so loaded they used their two first rounders on players that they entirely expected to be backups.

I don't want to go on, but I do want to issue a fair warning. This team has no weakness. The thing people have been harping on has been 2nd WR. 2nd WR! This is a team with TO (possibly the best player at his position in the league and certainly in the top 3), Jason Witten (one of the great all-time seasons by a TE last year) and a few excellent role players, and we're worrying about a #2 wideout? THIS is the weakness? Doesn't that raise a red flag in some people's minds?

I would be deeply interested to hear any legitimate case made for why the Cowboys aren't the most talented team in the NFL, as well as a case for why they shouldn't be the prohibitive favorites to make the Super Bowl from the NFC, beyond the usual worn out "They haven't won a playoff game" yarn. We are looking at quality of a team, and when I look around the league this year, I don't see another team that matches up to this one.

Addict
08-08-2008, 04:54 AM
yeah you don't sound like a homer at all I don't know where anyone would get that idea.

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 05:02 AM
5. Giants- The Giants were I believe if I remember right, the third youngest team last year, and they won the Super Bowl. This year Eli has some confidence, and will probably be way more consistent this year, not to say he will have MVP numbers but along the lines of 27 - 16 around that. The triple threat running game will not slow down, but now we know we had a draft day steal from the 7th round with Ahmad Bradshaw and should be used to complement Jacobs way more. Plaxico healthy will help Eli, and Toomer maybe slowing down a little, but Steve Smith will be healthy for the season and might eventually during the season take his spot as the #2. Even without Shockey we won the Super Bowl, so I don't think him leaving will hurt much. Without Strahan, we can't use Tuck as a DT, but that is fine, if anything we might move Kiwi back to DE and keep Tuck at DT, our pass rush will not be down much because I can see Kiwi, Tuck, and Osi only improving. Our secondary is much better than last year, with an improving Aaron Ross, and a much better coverage Safety than Gibril Wilson with Kenny Phillips, and Corey Webster might finally be a solid #2 corner.

THE GIANTS ARE NOT AN ELITE TEAM!

Now I know I'm automatically discredited b/c the fact that I have massive amounts of - rep and I am an Eagles fan but listen.

Eli is a mediocre QB who hit a hot streak at a good time last year. Eli has NEVER finished a season with a QB rating of 80 or higher. He's never completed a season with a completion percentage better than 57.7%. He has thrown 55 INTs in 3 Years of starting thats an average of 18.3 INTs a year as compared to his draft mates Philip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger:

Philip Rivers has thrown 24 INTs in 2 years of starting, thats an average of 12 INTs a year.
Big Ben has thrown 54 INTs in 4 years of starting, thats an average of 13.5 INTs a year, and thats even counting his horrid 2006 season with 23 INTs.


The Giants lost Jeremy Shockey. Now I know all of you are going to be like "But they won the superbowl without him!". Shockey was a good TE, he opened up running lanes and caught the ball well, he was an all-around TE. He brought an heir of toughness with him and had some scrap. Now the Giants replace a star TE with Kevin Boss for a whole season and expect the the Giants to be better off? Boss played admirably but not to Shockey's level.

Plaxico is injured with a sprained ankle and he wants a new contract. Getting injured in TC is never a good thing, especially if you are injury prone and were hobbled by injury to the same ankle last year.

Ahmad Bradshaw has been in jail. Derrick Ward is coming off of a Broken Leg (I believe).

Strahan is gone. Who replaces the void? Tuck. But now who is going to fill in the void that Tuck just vacated to take over for Strahan? Tuck is now the starting LE, meaning that he won't be lining up at DT in nickel packages anymore because he will be manning the LE spot. The Giant's defensive leader is gone. Kiwanuka isn't going to play DE, he has yet to play OLB consistently and he needs to learn how to do that before he plays DE, your going to over stimulate him for lack of a better term. You can't run if you don't know how to walk.

Beyond Osi and Tuck depth at DE is pretty bad. Giants DTs are mediocre. Mathis Kiwanuka is coming off of a major injury. Gerris Wilkinson is unproven and Antonio Pierce is a liability in coverage. Your DB situation is questionable at best. Kenny Phillips is still a rookie so you're going to have the typical rookie mistakes. Sammy Knight is older and he is average at best these days and beyond him there is no SS depth of mention. Sam Madison is older and is still servicable but teams are going to try and get mis-matches against him. Teams are going to try and have him line-up with the likes of Santana Moss and DeSean Jackson, (who are both lighting fast BTW). Beyond him, you've got RW McQuarters who is average. The Giants have young talent in Aaron Ross, Corey Webster and Terell Thomas. Webster is inconsistent and Thomas has yet to play an NFL down.

The Giants are the luckiest team in the world, 9/10 the Cowboys win that game, 9/10 the Patriots win that superbowl.

Caddy
08-08-2008, 05:52 AM
1a. Tampa Bay obviously. But the best of the rest are.

1b. San Diego Chargers: For some reason I am really high on the Chargers. If Phillip Rivers can continue to improve I really think the Chargers could do some damage this season.

2. New England Patriots: The Tom Brady and Randy Moss connection is almost unstoppable although there shaky secondary concerns me.

3. Dallas Cowboys: Dallas are the cream of the crop as far as the NFC goes and have the offensive and defensive power to trouble the AFC power houses.

4. Indianapolis Colts: If they didn't have Peyton Manning, they wouldn't be nearly this high.

5. Jacksonville Jaguars: They probably aren't the 5th best team in the NFL, but I'm a huge fan of what Jacksonville have going on.

Iamcanadian
08-08-2008, 05:57 AM
My list is simply

Elite Teams
New England - has won 3 and been in 4 , that's elite folks and it's not even close.

Wantabees
Indy - won 1, if they can bring home #2, they move up to elite. 1 does get you rated that high.
New York Giants - ditto for the Giants. - other team's fans are in denial over the Giants but they are only going to get better but they are still a wantabe until #2 is accomplished.

Yet to approach that status but have the talent
Dallas - haven't made it past round 1 so rating them as elite at this point is a joke - do it and you'll move up but until then you'll be looking up at the elite teams.
San Diego - young team with lots of potential but potential doesn't make you elite just yet

Nobody else is even close.

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 06:04 AM
all this Giants are elite talk is really pissing me off, they are going to miss the playoffs.

Iamcanadian
08-08-2008, 06:42 AM
all this Giants are elite talk is really pissing me off, they are going to miss the playoffs.

Hard for an Eagles fan to face the reality that the Giants and even Dallas are going to get a lot better while the Eagles are in decline after so many injuries to McNabb. You had a nice run as ther best in the NFC but it's over unless somehow McxNabb can actually stay healthy for a couple of more seasons.
I also have to question the Eagles failure to give McNabb a #1 receiver. McNabb looked like Brady when he had Owens to throw to but is far more limited now with no #1 WR.

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 07:03 AM
Hard for an Eagles fan to face the reality that the Giants and even Dallas are going to get a lot better while the Eagles are in decline after so many injuries to McNabb. You had a nice run as ther best in the NFC but it's over unless somehow McxNabb can actually stay healthy for a couple of more seasons.
I also have to question the Eagles failure to give McNabb a #1 receiver. McNabb looked like Brady when he had Owens to throw to but is far more limited now with no #1 WR.

OK, Giants are no good! Cowboys are better I'll give them that but the Giants suck arse.

Just so you know McNabb hasn't looked this good in TC since 2004.

But to adress your Eagles on the decline statement. Ok, 1st things 1st- lol lawlz OMG ROFL lol lol haha phew, now that that is over with.


QB of the future is on the team, his name is Kevin Kolb.
Lorenzo Booker the RB to replace Westbrook is looking like Reggie Bush in college in Eagles TC.
No #1 WR but the Eagles are loaded with #2 and #3 type WR
Shawn Andrews is the future RT.
The Eagles have a load of draft pick to choose a LT of the future.
DeSean Jackson is developing good chemistry with both McNabb and Kolb and is becoming a favorite target of theirs. He is only 22.
Trent Cole is only 25 and Omar Gaither is only 24 and they are defensive leaders already.
Mike Patterson lead all DTs in tackles last year and he is only 25
Broderick Bunkley is the most talented DL player on the Eagles, he is a beast at DT. He is only 24.
Stewart Bradley is a star in the making at MLB and he is only 24.
Chris Gocong is a good SLB and is only 24.
Victor Abiamiri is a young player who is the LE of the future and is only 22
Quintin Demps has impressed everyone in TC and is looking like the FS of the future for the Eagles, he is only 23.


The only old players on the team are Dawkins, William Thomas and Jon Runyan.
McNabb is only 32 and is only 1 year older than Tom Brady and the same age as Peyton Manning.

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 07:11 AM
OK, Giants are no good! Cowboys are better I'll give them that but the Giants suck arse.

Just so you know McNabb hasn't looked this good in TC since 2004.

But to adress your Eagles on the decline statement. Ok, 1st things 1st- lol lawlz OMG ROFL lol lol haha phew, now that that is over with.


QB of the future is on the team, his name is Kevin Kolb.
Lorenzo Booker the RB to replace Westbrook is looking like Reggie Bush in college in Eagles TC.
No #1 WR but the Eagles are loaded with #2 and #3 type WR
Shawn Andrews is the future RT.
The Eagles have a load of draft pick to choose a LT of the future.
DeSean Jackson is developing good chemistry with both McNabb and Kolb and is becoming a favorite target of theirs. He is only 22.
Trent Cole is only 25 and Omar Gaither is only 24 and they are defensive leaders already.
Mike Patterson lead all DTs in tackles last year and he is only 25
Broderick Bunkley is the most talented DL player on the Eagles, he is a beast at DT. He is only 24.
Stewart Bradley is a star in the making at MLB and he is only 24.
Chris Gocong is a good SLB and is only 24.
Victor Abiamiri is a young player who is the LE of the future and is only 22
Quintin Demps has impressed everyone in TC and is looking like the FS of the future for the Eagles, he is only 23.


The only old players on the team are Dawkins, William Thomas and Jon Runyan.
McNabb is only 32 and is only 1 year older than Tom Brady and the same age as Peyton Manning.


First off, who give a **** if he's the QB of the future? he isn't playing...

-lorezno booker, traded from THE DOLPHINS, is gonna be like Reggie Bush?

- you know Andrews isn't at camp right? so he hasn't had time to work on moving to OT. rumors swirling he's Rudy Cool and a teammate leaked it...

- I'm glad 2 weeks of training camp put a midget rookie with average hands as a greattarget for your QB's.

- i guess every young player is gonna be a star, huh?

Sinorice Moss is only 23 and he caught the ball last night! SUPERSTAR!

and now i go discredit your Giants hating post

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 07:19 AM
First off, who give a **** if he's the QB of the future? he isn't playing...
ummm...

-lorezno booker, traded from THE DOLPHINS, is gonna be like Reggie Bush?
Sure is, he's been lighting up Training Camp like nobodies buisness, he's been getting to the corner and taking it to the house. Hes been catching extremely well out of the backfield and he lines up at WR alot. He completly burned half the Eagles secondary.

- you know Andrews isn't at camp right? so he hasn't had time to work on moving to OT. rumors swirling he's Rudy Cool and a teammate leaked it...
Yes I know he isn't there, but he is a top OG in the NFL and he isn't "Rudy Cool" he's depressed because his best friend just died.

- I'm glad 2 weeks of training camp put a midget rookie with average hands as a greattarget for your QB's
- i guess every young player is gonna be a star, huh?
Well height won't be a problem when there is no one within 5 yards of him. And Jeez I really hope so :rolleyes:

Sinorice Moss is only 23 and he caught the ball last night! SUPERSTAR!
Sinorice Moss for MVP!

and now i go discredit your Giants hating post
I'll discredit your post that discredits me.

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 07:21 AM
THE GIANTS ARE NOT AN ELITE TEAM!

Now I know I'm automatically discredited b/c the fact that I have massive amounts of - rep and I am an Eagles fan but listen.

Eli is a mediocre QB who hit a hot streak at a good time last year. Eli has NEVER finished a season with a QB rating of 80 or higher. He's never completed a season with a completion percentage better than 57.7%. He has thrown 55 INTs in 3 Years of starting thats an average of 18.3 INTs a year as compared to his draft mates Philip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger:

Philip Rivers has thrown 24 INTs in 2 years of starting, thats an average of 12 INTs a year.
Big Ben has thrown 54 INTs in 4 years of starting, thats an average of 13.5 INTs a year, and thats even counting his horrid 2006 season with 23 INTs.


The Giants lost Jeremy Shockey. Now I know all of you are going to be like "But they won the superbowl without him!". Shockey was a good TE, he opened up running lanes and caught the ball well, he was an all-around TE. He brought an heir of toughness with him and had some scrap. Now the Giants replace a star TE with Kevin Boss for a whole season and expect the the Giants to be better off? Boss played admirably but not to Shockey's level.

Plaxico is injured with a sprained ankle and he wants a new contract. Getting injured in TC is never a good thing, especially if you are injury prone and were hobbled by injury to the same ankle last year.

Ahmad Bradshaw has been in jail. Derrick Ward is coming off of a Broken Leg (I believe).

Strahan is gone. Who replaces the void? Tuck. But now who is going to fill in the void that Tuck just vacated to take over for Strahan? Tuck is now the starting LE, meaning that he won't be lining up at DT in nickel packages anymore because he will be manning the LE spot. The Giant's defensive leader is gone. Kiwanuka isn't going to play DE, he has yet to play OLB consistently and he needs to learn how to do that before he plays DE, your going to over stimulate him for lack of a better term. You can't run if you don't know how to walk.

Beyond Osi and Tuck depth at DE is pretty bad. Giants DTs are mediocre. Mathis Kiwanuka is coming off of a major injury. Gerris Wilkinson is unproven and Antonio Pierce is a liability in coverage. Your DB situation is questionable at best. Kenny Phillips is still a rookie so you're going to have the typical rookie mistakes. Sammy Knight is older and he is average at best these days and beyond him there is no SS depth of mention. Sam Madison is older and is still servicable but teams are going to try and get mis-matches against him. Teams are going to try and have him line-up with the likes of Santana Moss and DeSean Jackson, (who are both lighting fast BTW). Beyond him, you've got RW McQuarters who is average. The Giants have young talent in Aaron Ross, Corey Webster and Terell Thomas. Webster is inconsistent and Thomas has yet to play an NFL down.

The Giants are the luckiest team in the world, 9/10 the Cowboys win that game, 9/10 the Patriots win that superbowl.

Have you watched the Giants pre-Shockey? He'll be missed for his blocking, but that's it. His drops, tantrums and douche-baggery won't be missed. Our OC even took shots at him last week talking how Boss has been great working with Eli. And you're kidding yourself if you don't think Boss is tough. He's no Shock, but he's not a va-jay-jay by an standards.

Plaxico's injury is BS. He just wants a new contract. His ankle is fine, and they're working on his deal. He said he won't holdout even if he doesn't get a deal. He's milking the injury, but will play and won't be a distraction. AT ALL.

Of course Strahan is missed, but tuck at LDE will work. He'll move inside and Kiwi to DE in the nickle. That's been stated by coaches for weeks. Kiwi knows how to play DE, he did his whole college career, and has adapted to OLB greatly having last year to learn. Is AP really a liability in coverage? And he's our leader, even Stray said AP was just as vocal.

Our DE depth is very good actually. We've got alot of hungry young guys battling it out and Tollefson played alot in the playoffs spelling Osi and Stray. Now you're pulling things out of your ass. Wilkinson probably won't start so theres that...

Madison is our 4th CB now.... RW may get cut, so again, you're way off.

Phillips is an animal, and Knight won't start. Butler started all last year, he's our "QB of the secondary" praised by all the coaches and DB's. And yes, our DT's are average at best.

But WTF does Bradshaw in jail have to do with ANYTHING?

And ward and kiwi were injured like8 months ago. They were fine lst night. You're graasping at straws and failing miserabley

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 07:23 AM
ummm...


Sure is, he's been lighting up Training Camp like nobodies buisness, he's been getting to the corner and taking it to the house. Hes been catching extremely well out of the backfield and he lines up at WR alot. He completly burned half the Eagles secondary.


Yes I know he isn't there, but he is a top OG in the NFL and he isn't "Rudy Cool" he's depressed because his best friend just died.


Well height won't be a problem when there is no one within 5 yards of him. And Jeez I really hope so :rolleyes:


Sinorice Moss for MVP!


I'll discredit your post that discredits me.

So Booker tearing up you're 2nd team D makes him Reggie Bush, the most explosive college football player in history?

and Jackson is fast, but THAT fast? surely you jest.

it doesn't take months to get over a death. There've been NUMEROUS reports by Philly papers he's rudy cool and his teammates called him out. There's a pic around somewhere, I'll find it for you

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 07:38 AM
[color=scarlet] Have you watched the Giants pre-Shockey? He'll be missed for his blocking, but that's it. His drops, tantrums and douche-baggery won't be missed. Our OC even took shots at him last week talking how Boss has been great working with Eli. And you're kidding yourself if you don't think Boss is tough. He's no Shock, but he's not a va-jay-jay by an standards.

You're under-estimating the value of Shockey. Boss is nice but he is not a Jeremy Shockey. Your offense just took a down-grade.

Plaxico's injury is BS. He just wants a new contract. His ankle is fine, and they're working on his deal. He said he won't holdout even if he doesn't get a deal. He's milking the injury, but will play and won't be a distraction. AT ALL.

So you're trying to tell me that he is faking an injury to get a contract?

Of course Strahan is missed, but tuck at LDE will work. He'll move inside and Kiwi to DE in the nickle. That's been stated by coaches for weeks. Kiwi knows how to play DE, he did his whole college career, and has adapted to OLB greatly having last year to learn. Is AP really a liability in coverage? And he's our leader, even Stray said AP was just as vocal.

I know Kiwi playede DE all through college but he should learn to play SLB before you make him play 2 posistions. So AP is your leader, so he still sucks in coverage regardless of loud he is.

Our DE depth is very good actually. We've got alot of hungry young guys battling it out and Tollefson played alot in the playoffs spelling Osi and Stray. Now you're pulling things out of your ass. Wilkinson probably won't start so theres that...

Really a bunch of no name, late round draft picks, UDFA and an old veteran are good depth? Who starts at WLB then? Jonathan Goff? Danny Clark? Not much better.

Madison is our 4th CB now.... RW may get cut, so again, you're way off.

Phillips is an animal, and Knight won't start. Butler started all last year, he's our "QB of the secondary" praised by all the coaches and DB's. And yes, our DT's are average at best

Phillips is still a rookie and he's going to make mistakes and have mental lapses, I think he'll be great in the future but he'll struggle this year against the pass.

But WTF does Bradshaw in jail have to do with ANYTHING?

IDK, but it isn't exactly a good thing.

I notice you didn't refute my Eli Manning statement :D

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 07:41 AM
So Booker tearing up you're 2nd team D makes him Reggie Bush, the most explosive college football player in history?

and Jackson is fast, but THAT fast? surely you jest.

it doesn't take months to get over a death. There've been NUMEROUS reports by Philly papers he's rudy cool and his teammates called him out. There's a pic around somewhere, I'll find it for you

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h7/vinrock23/Parties015.jpg

This One?

Bookers has been tearing up the 1st team defense with the second string offense.

Maybe I exagerated on the Jackson thing :D

eaglesalltheway
08-08-2008, 07:48 AM
I'm joining in a tad late, but mine ism in no particular order.
New England Patriots
Indianapolis Colts
Dallas Cowboys
Jacksonville Jaguars
San Diego Chargers

I have faith in Aaron Rogers, but I don't know quite how much he can do this year. I still think that the Packers make the playoffs, either as the Norris champ or the Wildcard, but I don' tthink I'd put them up there with these 5, even with Favre. The Saints have the potential to be great, but I just don't see the superbowl potential right now.

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 08:25 AM
You're under-estimating the value of Shockey. Boss is nice but he is not a Jeremy Shockey. Your offense just took a down-grade.



So you're trying to tell me that he is faking an injury to get a contract?



I know Kiwi playede DE all through college but he should learn to play SLB before you make him play 2 posistions. So AP is your leader, so he still sucks in coverage regardless of loud he is.

Ou

Really a bunch of no name, late round draft picks, UDFA and an old veteran are good depth? Who starts at WLB then? Jonathan Goff? Danny Clark? Not much better.





Phillips is still a rookie and he's going to make mistakes and have mental lapses, I think he'll be great in the future but he'll struggle this year against the pass.



IDK, but it isn't exactly a good thing.

I notice you didn't refute my Eli Manning statement :D

I've watched Shockey for 5 years, I'm not under-estimating him

and yes, that's exactly what Plax is doing. He's not faking, but milking it. He's been cleared for a couple days.

So what if our young guys are unproven? What's the difference between our young guys and your "future star" young guys? What makes them future stars and ours unproven? I guarantee you our "unproven guys" have just as much time as your "future stars"

Kiwi knows how to play SLB. he's an SLB. He'll rush the passer on 3rd down. Not exactly rocket science or learning 2 positions.

and everyone knows Eli throwsa **** load of INT's. didn't stop him from sweeping the Eagles last year, did it?

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 08:27 AM
I dont even think there are 5 dominant teams in the NFL but if i had to pick some i would pick New England and Indy maybe the Dallas. The giants still dont impress me

http://giants.lohudblogs.com/files/2008/05/1207173316.jpg

yes, quite unimpressive

Gay Ork Wang
08-08-2008, 08:42 AM
Im not sure if i would put the Giants in the Top 5, but there can be made a case for them and i really dont know why people dont get it. Clear Cut? Maybe not. But def up there

Smooth Criminal
08-08-2008, 08:48 AM
NE
Indy
Dallas
SD
Jacksonville

And look at that. The Steelers play ALL 5 of those teams this year.

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 08:52 AM
Im not sure if i would put the Giants in the Top 5, but there can be made a case for them and i really dont know why people dont get it. Clear Cut? Maybe not. But def up there

Clear cut? probably not, but they really should be. Granted, most are NFC East posters who hate the Giants, with D being the only NFC East poster who has the giants up there.

Smooth Criminal
08-08-2008, 09:00 AM
http://giants.lohudblogs.com/files/2008/05/1207173316.jpg

yes, quite unimpressive


That doesn't matter this season.

Only thing that matter this year is what the 53 guys on their roster can do. Don't be expecting another one of those.

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 09:04 AM
That doesn't matter this season.

Only thing that matter this year is what the 53 guys on their roster can do. Don't be expecting another one of those.

Why shouldn't I be expecting it? We're the Super Bowl champs, and I know non-Giants fans don't know this, but we're not changed at all. Phillips is an upgrade at safety, and our locker room is now quiet and safe. We'll have close to the same 53 guys back.

But it's fine, winning Super Bowls is over rated anyway, right?

Obviously the fact we won one last year isn't "impressive"(quoting the skins fan). It means something towards being elite seeing as all the teams you listed didn't do it so if they're elite, and the Giants did something they couldn't...what's that make us? And don't give me that lucky crap. Real men make their own luck

Bigburt63
08-08-2008, 09:07 AM
Not to sound like a homer, but i think the notion that the pats are aging is getting blown a little bit out of proportion. The pats are aging, but they have already begun to infuse some youth at the positions they are aging most. At LB they signed Hobson, drafted Mayo, Crable, and lost Seau (for now), thus adding more speed and youth. In the secondary they lost samuel (which sucks), *** (who cares), wilson (again, who cares), but still have meriweather, sanders, and harrison at S, with wheatley, wilhite, sander, bryant, meriweather at times, and hobbs at corner. Also, tank williams will be playing a S/LB type role. Those are really the two main areas we were getting old at, OL is all back, and fairly young, WR the oldest is Moss but he's still playing at an elite level, DL is in the prime of their careers. Granted alot fo youth isnt necessarily a good thing either...

Bengalsrocket
08-08-2008, 09:35 AM
Man if my team won the Superbowl and everyone was shouting luck in my face I'd probably lose it eventually lol.

Regardless of what people say, Giants were the best on Sunday and if they did it against such impossible odds it just makes it all that much more impressive to me.

Sub-definition of Elite is relevant here, but I guess we'll just go with the teams that will play at a high level of competition in the next few years:

1) Patriots
2) Colts
3) Cowboys
4) Chargers

All 4 of the above teams have both a well balanced offense and well balanced defense, giving them a well balanced overall team. I dislike people who think you can win with just a ground or just an aerial attack, simply put: you need both. And likewise people who think you can win with just a defense or just an offense are out of their minds; I'm not saying its impossible just improbable.

5) Steelers

Probably weird that I went on a little rant about people hating on the Giants and then I didn't put them in my top 5, but I will say I think there are more than 5 teams that are going to raise the level of competition over the next couple of years, and giants are right there with these guys.

As far as the Steelers go and why they got the nod ahead of other likely teams such as Jags / Giants / Redskins and a couple others; its simply because of their dominance over the A.F.C. north/central since 1994 (They've won it 8/14 times - and 1 of the times they didn't win it, they went on to win the superbowl :) ) and I think they'll continue to be a competitive force in this league for the next several years.

Or maybe I just notice them more since they spank my team twice a year... you decide :)

Gay Ork Wang
08-08-2008, 09:39 AM
Why do people make these threads? I mean they always become homer battles
So many homers!

NY+Giants=NYG
08-08-2008, 09:47 AM
So many homers!

Yeah these type of threads, and let's rank players are probably the biggest fluff type threads on a football MB.

Bigburt63
08-08-2008, 09:48 AM
Ya but its been a really slow period, its only now starting to pick up a little bit. I mean, the past few weeks its been stuff like this, how awesome everybody is doing in camp, or Farve...

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 10:03 AM
So many homers!

hey, it's my thing! :D

but seriously i haven't even been bad in this thread at all!

NY+Giants=NYG
08-08-2008, 10:13 AM
That doesn't matter this season.

Only thing that matter this year is what the 53 guys on their roster can do. Don't be expecting another one of those.

Why not? That's what all NY fans expect. That's why it's hard to play in NY, because all our sports expect titles, and there is no coincidence that alot of our fan base are also Yankees fans. We expect superbowls, and that's the goal every year.

Now realistically we may not win again, but who cares, we have now 3 superbowls and 7 championships. I expect us to do well, because we didn't lose key people, and we drafted well, and supplemented our roster with the FAs we need. We are also a young team too. So I expect us to be in the mix, unless something bad happens.

Bigburt63
08-08-2008, 10:16 AM
hey, it's my thing! :D

but seriously i haven't even been bad in this thread at all!

Ur boy rice looked good last night...at least until mayo knocked his helmet off:)

eaglesalltheway
08-08-2008, 01:33 PM
I've got this question for Giants fans, three years ago, when Pittsburg won the superbowl, did you say their run was lucky? I'll bet a lot of you did, and you would be right. The same is true for the Giants this past year, they got lucky at the right time. I don't blame you for backing your team, but when its someoen else, I bet you guys have a totally different persprective.

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 01:41 PM
I've got this question for Giants fans, three years ago, when Pittsburg won the superbowl, did you say their run was lucky? I'll bet a lot of you did, and you would be right. The same is true for the Giants this past year, they got lucky at the right time. I don't blame you for backing your team, but when its someoen else, I bet you guys have a totally different persprective.

I didn't. Thought they were a good team. Probably lucky they played the biggest va-jay-jay team in the Super Bowl('hawks). But I thought they were a pretty good team. Very solid D, strong OL and nice weapons.

Also, unless a total fluke play happens, I don't believe it's lucky. It's playing well when it matters, which I call "clutch"

Jensen
08-08-2008, 01:48 PM
1. New England Patriots
2. San Diego Chargers
3. Dallas Cowboys
4. Indianapolis Colts
5. Pittsburgh Steelers

MetSox17
08-08-2008, 01:52 PM
Also, unless a total fluke play happens, I don't believe it's lucky. It's playing well when it matters, which I call "clutch"


Ben Roethlisberger stumbling over himself and shoe-lace tackling Nick Harper was skill?

ALD
08-08-2008, 02:20 PM
I'm just going to breakdown our whole team as a lot of people seem not to know much about the superbowl champs.

Eli hasn't had great numbers, he's thrown a lot of INTs, these are all facts, but here are some other facts to consider, Eli has had very inconsistent coaching and some horrible play calling that put him in a position to force a lot of balls, if you don't think forcing the ball deep results in more INTs then you should try watching some football before coming back to comment on this board. Actually if you want proof look at what eli's done in the hurry up offense where he got more freedom, he's simply clutch and a guy you can be confident in to drive the team for scores when they're needed.

Losing Shockey hurts our running game because he was crucial to sealing the edge, but without him Jacobs will be running more iso and other up the middle runs where sealing the edge isn't as vital to make up for his slow first step. Bradshaw was probably our best RB last season and didn't get much PT until late in the season, now he'll be a big piece from the get go. and Ward is arguably one of the best 3rd string RBs in the league, we'll run the ball successfully even without Shockey.

As for our Receivers Plax is actually going to be healthy enough to practice, that's a serious improvement over last season where he was still good enough to torch some of the leagues best corners. Smith was huge for us late in the season and now Gilbride has time to work him into the O from TC on. Toomer has slowed down, but he's still a smart vet and has good hands. Losing Shockey hurts our decoy routes, but Boss has great chemistry with Eli and he might not be the fierce mofo Shockey was, but he'll do fine as a secondary weapon.

Our Oline is still one of the best in the league and we've improved our depth, finally having a viable backup OT not named Guy Whimper.

On D Tuck is physically better than strahan was last year and should be fine as our LE in our base D, in our nickel packages he'll still play that UT role he flourished in last year, with Kiwi putting his hand down outside.

Strahan was a leader, but AP was the leader for this D and there's no reason for him to be worse, i've heard he isn't as fat this year as last which will only help him. Regardless whether Wilk can get healthy and win the starting WLB spot we'll be fine with Clark, Wilk, Kehl and Goff fighting for that spot. And Kiwi has been looking a lot better and is actually taking good angles against the run this year in TC, plus Torbor really wasn't anything special so replacing him won't be hard.

Now on to our secondary, the most improved part of this team, last year we started the season with RW and Madison starting at corner, this year Madison will be fighting for the 3rd corner spot with Thomas and Dockery, RW will probably be cut. Ross was very good for a rookie corner when he finally got on the field, this season he'll be more adjusted to the NFL and be starting from day 1, depending on how spags uses him he'll either be shutting down teams #2 WRs or slowing their #1s. Webster showed he can be a very effective player when used in press man, I really doubt he's not significantly better than either of our starters at the start of last season. Now our safety group is a lot better, I loved Gibril but he was played out of position simply because we didn't have anyone at safety who could run and cover, phillips will be an upgrade from day one and for those who like camp news he's been lighting things up. At the other starter spot it'll be either Butler or Knight playing the more veteran in the box role and both are good fits, if they struggle we still have Michael Johnson who showed good flashes last season and with some seasoning will be the perfect fit for that in the box role.

Now when discussing our D it's also vital to realize how much Spags moves people around and puts them in different positions to use their strengths, most of our starters or top subs are very versatile and can be used from different spots, Tuck, Kiwi, Ross, Thomas, Webster, etc.

I just don't see this team not improving on last season performance and while I doubt we repeat I think it's somewhat absurd not to consider us an elite team.

ALD
08-08-2008, 02:27 PM
I've got this question for Giants fans, three years ago, when Pittsburg won the superbowl, did you say their run was lucky? I'll bet a lot of you did, and you would be right. The same is true for the Giants this past year, they got lucky at the right time. I don't blame you for backing your team, but when its someoen else, I bet you guys have a totally different persprective.

Only luck they had was playing the seahawks in the superbowl, I really wasn't a fan and think if the NFC wasn't so bad that year they wouldn't have even gotten to the NFC title game, put that team in last year NFC playoffs and I doubt the beat the giants, packers or cowboys.

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 02:36 PM
You make me want to punch a wall. Seriously, the Giants are AVERAGE! Not spectacular, not terrible just middle of the road average. Why? Because your QB is not good!

Maybe you missed this so I'll repeat:

Eli is a mediocre QB who hit a hot streak at a good time last year. Eli has NEVER finished a season with a QB rating of 80 or higher. He's never completed a season with a completion percentage better than 57.7%. He has thrown 55 INTs in 3 Years of starting thats an average of 18.3 INTs a year as compared to his draft mates Philip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger:

Philip Rivers has thrown 24 INTs in 2 years of starting, thats an average of 12 INTs a year. Has a career completion percentage of 60.8%.
Big Ben has thrown 54 INTs in 4 years of starting, thats an average of 13.5 INTs a year, and thats even counting his horrid 2006 season with 23 INTs. He has a career completion percentage of 63.2%.

ALD
08-08-2008, 02:42 PM
You make me want to punch a wall. Seriously, the Giants are AVERAGE! Not spectacular, not terrible just middle of the road average. Why? Because your QB is not good!

Maybe you missed this so I'll repeat:

Eli is a mediocre QB who hit a hot streak at a good time last year. Eli has NEVER finished a season with a QB rating of 80 or higher. He's never completed a season with a completion percentage better than 57.7%. He has thrown 55 INTs in 3 Years of starting thats an average of 18.3 INTs a year as compared to his draft mates Philip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger:

Philip Rivers has thrown 24 INTs in 2 years of starting, thats an average of 12 INTs a year. Has a career completion percentage of 60.8%.
Big Ben has thrown 54 INTs in 4 years of starting, thats an average of 13.5 INTs a year, and thats even counting his horrid 2006 season with 23 INTs. He has a career completion percentage of 63.2%.


Good job reading my second paragraph when it comes to coaching, forcing deep balls, his success in the hurry up, etc. Really well done, those stats make it clear that you're an idiot, this isn't meant as a personal attack, simply an analysis of the data you have provided. I'm sorry if you're actually an intelligent person who just happens to be ignorant when it comes to football.

Edit: I've figured it out, you just don't realize that repeating a terrible argument doesn't make it better. Ignore the this post, because I know what your response is going to be "Eli's a mediocre QB who got lucky and has 55 INTs over 3 years starting" right?

Gay Ork Wang
08-08-2008, 03:05 PM
Good job reading my second paragraph when it comes to coaching, forcing deep balls, his success in the hurry up, etc. Really well done, those stats make it clear that you're an idiot, this isn't meant as a personal attack, simply an analysis of the data you have provided. I'm sorry if you're actually an intelligent person who just happens to be ignorant when it comes to football.

Edit: I've figured it out, you just don't realize that repeating a terrible argument doesn't make it better. Ignore the this post, because I know what your response is going to be "Eli's a mediocre QB who got lucky and has 55 INTs over 3 years starting" right?
Dont mind Eaglesfan, he can only understand Troll

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 03:08 PM
it's OK, you'll see in the regular season when the Eli fails badly.

ALD
08-08-2008, 03:09 PM
Dont mind Eaglesfan, he can only understand Troll

Oh I don't mind, I just tend to think all people can learn and lose their ignorance, maybe I'm just an optimist though.

ALD
08-08-2008, 03:11 PM
it's OK, you'll see in the regular season when the Eli fails badly.

Just like the last three seasons where he's taken the giants to the playoffs.

BTW Romo is a mediocre QB because his QB rating was under 80 in games within 7 points.

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 03:12 PM
Tony Romo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eli Manning

ALD
08-08-2008, 03:14 PM
Tony Romo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eli Manning

Eli's rating was more than 5 points higher in games that ended with a final margin of 7 or less points, so clearly Eli >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> romo :rolleyes:

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 03:17 PM
you're pulling **** out of your ass and your not doing good, your being a sarcastic little **** and it is quite annoying, maybe instead of being sarcastic, you could actually try and refute my points, because I am starting to doubt you can. The only thing you've done so far is call me ignorant and an idiot, you have yet to try and prove me wrong.

ALD
08-08-2008, 03:24 PM
you're pulling **** out of your ass and your not doing good, your being a sarcastic little **** and it is quite annoying, maybe instead of being sarcastic, you could actually try and refute my points, because I am starting to doubt you can. The only thing you've done so far is call me ignorant and an idiot, you have yet to try and prove me wrong.

Reading really isn't your forte is it?

Eli hasn't had great numbers, he's thrown a lot of INTs, these are all facts, but here are some other facts to consider, Eli has had very inconsistent coaching and some horrible play calling that put him in a position to force a lot of balls, if you don't think forcing the ball deep results in more INTs then you should try watching some football before coming back to comment on this board. Actually if you want proof look at what eli's done in the hurry up offense where he got more freedom, he's simply clutch and a guy you can be confident in to drive the team for scores when they're needed.

ALD
08-08-2008, 03:25 PM
btw the stats I noted are true, go check the splits for both QBs
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=5526
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=5209

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 03:28 PM
A homer? I'll readily admit the 'boys are better than the Eagles. But, the Giants are not.

Brandon Jacobs is one of the top power RBs in the NFL, Bradshaw is electric when in the game and Ward is arguably one of the top 3rd string RBs.
Your O-line is good.
Justin Tuck is better than Victor Abiamiri as of now. Osi and Cole are exactly even.
Your DBs are going to be great in the future. Kenny Phillips, Aaron Ross, Corey Webster and Terell Thomas are all good and will form one of the best secondaries in the NFL in the future.

I don't have my Giant Homer glasses on so therefore, I can realize that Eli Manning is average.

eaglesfan_45
08-08-2008, 03:33 PM
Eli hasn't had great numbers, he's thrown a lot of INTs, these are all facts, but here are some other facts to consider, Eli has had very inconsistent coaching and some horrible play calling that put him in a position to force a lot of balls, if you don't think forcing the ball deep results in more INTs then you should try watching some football before coming back to comment on this board. Actually if you want proof look at what eli's done in the hurry up offense where he got more freedom, he's simply clutch and a guy you can be confident in to drive the team for scores when they're needed.


-True he hasn't had great numbers and he's turned the ball over many times.
-Terrible play calling? inconsitant coaching? Excuses.

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 06:25 PM
Ben Roethlisberger stumbling over himself and shoe-lace tackling Nick Harper was skill?

True, but didn't the Bus fumble on like the one? come on, how many times does THAT happen? he's not exactly early Jacobs/Tiki when it came to fumbling...

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 06:29 PM
You make me want to punch a wall. Seriously, the Giants are AVERAGE! Not spectacular, not terrible just middle of the road average. Why? Because your QB is not good!

Maybe you missed this so I'll repeat:

Eli is a mediocre QB who hit a hot streak at a good time last year. Eli has NEVER finished a season with a QB rating of 80 or higher. He's never completed a season with a completion percentage better than 57.7%. He has thrown 55 INTs in 3 Years of starting thats an average of 18.3 INTs a year as compared to his draft mates Philip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger:

Philip Rivers has thrown 24 INTs in 2 years of starting, thats an average of 12 INTs a year. Has a career completion percentage of 60.8%.
Big Ben has thrown 54 INTs in 4 years of starting, thats an average of 13.5 INTs a year, and thats even counting his horrid 2006 season with 23 INTs. He has a career completion percentage of 63.2%.


didn't this same mediocre QB lead us to the playoffs 3 straight years? and a Super Bowl win? sure, he can be mediocre, but that hasn't stopped the Giants yet, has it? Please explain this to me. I mean since Eli is mediocre, the Giants will be average, yet the SAME EXACT ELI, led us to the Super Bowl 42 win. Is that mediocre?

I'll take his mediocre ass anyday as long as he sweeps the better QB McNabb this year just like last

bantx
08-08-2008, 06:31 PM
HE may had lead the giants to a win on the last drive but how can a giants fan say the defense didnt have anything to do with their playoff success, cause ur making it seem like it

EDIT***

scottyboy
08-08-2008, 06:35 PM
I may had lead the giants to a win on the last drive but how can a giants fan say the defense didnt have anything to do with their playoff success, cause ur making it seem like it

nonononononono. I'm saying the Giants haven't lost because of Eli being "mediocre". This guy says the Giants will be average at best because of Eli, when in fact, that sme QB has 3 straight playoff appearances and a Super Bowl ring.

CC.SD
08-08-2008, 06:45 PM
All Scotty is saying is that it doesn't matter how Eli performs on an individual basis; That team has been to the playoffs three straight times and won a Super Bowl. Why would you change anything, anything at all? Guess what, these "who has the best QB" arguments only matter on message boards. At the end of the day the only thing that matters in the NFL is championships, and right now the Giants are the champions.

There's no game more dependent on chemistry and team makeup than football, and the way the Giants have their team right now, including the QB position, something morphed itself into a champion. That's success and that's all that matters.

The reason I didn't mention anything about the Giants during my "elite" list is because I listed what I believe to be the 2008 elite teams. But there's no question in my mind that the Giants ended up the elitest of the elite in 2007. They won it all. And it was a complete team effort.

ALD
08-08-2008, 07:38 PM
-True he hasn't had great numbers and he's turned the ball over many times.
-Terrible play calling? inconsitant coaching? Excuses.

You really can't be this clueless...can you? :eek:

Unbiased
08-08-2008, 07:54 PM
No I didn't. I may have said something about them being too low when placed at 21. think about it, according to what I have for my 5 elite, NO would be 30th - a far cry from 21.

You said something along the lines of, "More like 32nd."

DMWSackMachine
08-08-2008, 07:57 PM
Why not? That's what all NY fans expect. That's why it's hard to play in NY, because all our sports expect titles, and there is no coincidence that alot of our fan base are also Yankees fans. We expect superbowls, and that's the goal every year.

Now realistically we may not win again, but who cares, we have now 3 superbowls and 7 championships. I expect us to do well, because we didn't lose key people, and we drafted well, and supplemented our roster with the FAs we need. We are also a young team too. So I expect us to be in the mix, unless something bad happens.

Excuse me? You didn't just seriously say that, did you?

Look, I like parts of the Giants team a lot. Love your stable of DEs, naturally. I like the cohesion and intensity that your line brings every Sunday. I like the way your RB rotation performs when everything is clicking.

But to say you didn't lose key people!! Two years ago at this time, any Giant fan worth his salt would have listed Strahan, Shockey, Tiki, and Osi as your 4 best players. Now? Three of those players are gone. Don't tell me you haven't lost key players. You lost possibly your best single offensive player and DEFINITELY your best defensive player, as well as the elder statesman and #1 leader of the team.

Can they overcome it? It is possible, true, but if you're talking about probability I would say it isn't great that they will.

As far as this "Look! They won the Super Bowl!1" reasoning....Since when does a SB championship guarantee anything for the next year? Let's take a look at the last few wild card teams that have come out of nowhere to win a Super Bowl and how they performed the following season:

2005 Pittsburgh Steelers:

SB Season: 11-5
Seeded: 6th
Story: A mind boggling series of events including possibly the brightest young QB in the league blowing his knee out on the 2nd play from scrimmage in the 1st round, followed by one of the great upsets in NFL history against the Colts featuring "The Tackle" by Big Ben and a last minute missed FG by one of the best FG kickers in league history. This team never looked like a juggernaut until the AFC Champ game when they dismantled a very good Denver team. Went on to win the ugliest Super Bowl in my lifetime.
Following year: 2006 record 8-8
Story: Most would blame the offseason trouble with Big Ben for what happened, but a defense that had been perennially in the top of the league dropped off dramatically. Key defections on offense (Randle El, Bettis) and the ongoing Roethlisberger saga made this one of the most inefficient and TO prone Steelers teams ever.

2000 Baltimore Ravens:

SB season: 12-4
Seeded: 4th
Story: A team that dominated defensively all year long took it to a whole different level in the playoffs. Led by a no-mistakes QB who played within himself and a bruising running game featuring Jamal Lewis, this team finished the season on a 7 game winning streak after starting the season 5-4. A weird playoffs that pitted them against the two AFC favorites for the SB--Oakland and Tennessee--showed a team that had become an all-time defensive power, shutting down the vaunted Oakland passing attack (167 yards, 3 points) by first limiting Rich Gannon and then knocking him out of the game. In the Super Bowl, they ran into a similar Cinderalla Giants team who, unfortunately, had been more bark than bite in making it to the big game.
Following year: 2001 record 10-6
Story: The defection of Trent Dilfer hurt the team, though many thought they had upgraded by bringing in Elvis Grbac. Jamal Lewis blows his knee out in TC, and it certainly hurts, but it may not have been such a big deal had they not allowed a certain undrafted RB from Texas by the name of Priest Holmes to leave. The defense was basically as suffocating as ever, and the pass rush was actually significantly improved from the year before, notching 45 sacks compared to 35 by the SB team. All around, though, just not a good enough team to hang with the real power players in the NFL.

Also, though the 2001 NE Pats weren't a wild card team, they fit the profile extremely well. Finishing 11-5 after starting the season 5-5, they spent the whole year winning games by the skin of their teeth. Eventually, due to a down year by the AFC, they were able to secure the #2 spot in the conference despite finishing just 11-5. Everyone knows the story from there on out. The Tuck Rule game, followed by one of the all-time choke jobs by the Steelers and Kordell Stewart, and culminating in the SB vs. the Rams.

The next year, however, they bumbled their way to a 9-7 record (while still nearly winning the division...:O) as all the breaks that went their way the year before turned on them. They didn't really have any serious defections in terms of personnel, either--though I can't remember if they had any serious injuries. They just weren't that good...and they got exposed as such.


The point is, in the NFL certain things happen, breaks go the right way for you, and it can make a team look much better (or much worse) than they really are. No one can take the 2007 Super Bowl victory away from the Giants, even if they wanted to--which I, personally would never do, it was one of the greatest non-Cowboy football moments of my lifetime--but that doesn't mean we have to pretend they are better than they really are. They didn't win during the playoffs in particularly impressive fashion. They just got some breaks, and played with so much heart that they were able to be in position to exploit those breaks. They are still a team with a mediocre QB, suspect LBs, a porous secondary, middling interior DL play and very few top-tier players at the skill positions. They will have a fight on their hands to make the playoffs. Just like all the other "out of nowhere" teams that have won a SB.

CJSchneider
08-08-2008, 09:44 PM
You said something along the lines of, "More like 32nd."

"More like 32nd" and I guarantee a Super Bowl are kinda different.

ALD
08-08-2008, 09:54 PM
Excuse me? You didn't just seriously say that, did you?

Look, I like parts of the Giants team a lot. Love your stable of DEs, naturally. I like the cohesion and intensity that your line brings every Sunday. I like the way your RB rotation performs when everything is clicking.

But to say you didn't lose key people!! Two years ago at this time, any Giant fan worth his salt would have listed Strahan, Shockey, Tiki, and Osi as your 4 best players. Now? Three of those players are gone. Don't tell me you haven't lost key players. You lost possibly your best single offensive player and DEFINITELY your best defensive player, as well as the elder statesman and #1 leader of the team.

Can they overcome it? It is possible, true, but if you're talking about probability I would say it isn't great that they will.

As far as this "Look! They won the Super Bowl!1" reasoning....Since when does a SB championship guarantee anything for the next year? Let's take a look at the last few wild card teams that have come out of nowhere to win a Super Bowl and how they performed the following season:

2005 Pittsburgh Steelers:

SB Season: 11-5
Seeded: 6th
Story: A mind boggling series of events including possibly the brightest young QB in the league blowing his knee out on the 2nd play from scrimmage in the 1st round, followed by one of the great upsets in NFL history against the Colts featuring "The Tackle" by Big Ben and a last minute missed FG by one of the best FG kickers in league history. This team never looked like a juggernaut until the AFC Champ game when they dismantled a very good Denver team. Went on to win the ugliest Super Bowl in my lifetime.
Following year: 2006 record 8-8
Story: Most would blame the offseason trouble with Big Ben for what happened, but a defense that had been perennially in the top of the league dropped off dramatically. Key defections on offense (Randle El, Bettis) and the ongoing Roethlisberger saga made this one of the most inefficient and TO prone Steelers teams ever.

2000 Baltimore Ravens:

SB season: 12-4
Seeded: 4th
Story: A team that dominated defensively all year long took it to a whole different level in the playoffs. Led by a no-mistakes QB who played within himself and a bruising running game featuring Jamal Lewis, this team finished the season on a 7 game winning streak after starting the season 5-4. A weird playoffs that pitted them against the two AFC favorites for the SB--Oakland and Tennessee--showed a team that had become an all-time defensive power, shutting down the vaunted Oakland passing attack (167 yards, 3 points) by first limiting Rich Gannon and then knocking him out of the game. In the Super Bowl, they ran into a similar Cinderalla Giants team who, unfortunately, had been more bark than bite in making it to the big game.
Following year: 2001 record 10-6
Story: The defection of Trent Dilfer hurt the team, though many thought they had upgraded by bringing in Elvis Grbac. Jamal Lewis blows his knee out in TC, and it certainly hurts, but it may not have been such a big deal had they not allowed a certain undrafted RB from Texas by the name of Priest Holmes to leave. The defense was basically as suffocating as ever, and the pass rush was actually significantly improved from the year before, notching 45 sacks compared to 35 by the SB team. All around, though, just not a good enough team to hang with the real power players in the NFL.

Also, though the 2001 NE Pats weren't a wild card team, they fit the profile extremely well. Finishing 11-5 after starting the season 5-5, they spent the whole year winning games by the skin of their teeth. Eventually, due to a down year by the AFC, they were able to secure the #2 spot in the conference despite finishing just 11-5. Everyone knows the story from there on out. The Tuck Rule game, followed by one of the all-time choke jobs by the Steelers and Kordell Stewart, and culminating in the SB vs. the Rams.

The next year, however, they bumbled their way to a 9-7 record (while still nearly winning the division...:O) as all the breaks that went their way the year before turned on them. They didn't really have any serious defections in terms of personnel, either--though I can't remember if they had any serious injuries. They just weren't that good...and they got exposed as such.


The point is, in the NFL certain things happen, breaks go the right way for you, and it can make a team look much better (or much worse) than they really are. No one can take the 2007 Super Bowl victory away from the Giants, even if they wanted to--which I, personally would never do, it was one of the greatest non-Cowboy football moments of my lifetime--but that doesn't mean we have to pretend they are better than they really are. They didn't win during the playoffs in particularly impressive fashion. They just got some breaks, and played with so much heart that they were able to be in position to exploit those breaks. They are still a team with a mediocre QB, suspect LBs, a porous secondary, middling interior DL play and very few top-tier players at the skill positions. They will have a fight on their hands to make the playoffs. Just like all the other "out of nowhere" teams that have won a SB.


We lost one our key people last offseason and got significantly better. You want to know why? We replaced him, tiki, with young players and better team cohesion. If you subscribe to the popular shockey was a clubhouse cancer theory our team cohesion should once again improve significantly and his production as a receiver should be replaced by boss, and his blocking can be replaced with primarily blcoking TE.

As for Strahan I'd rank him below Osi and AP for sure and Tuck was probably as good. In terms of leadership AP was as much of a leader for sure and Eli stepped into a leadership role as well. So yes we did lose key people, but not irreplaceable people, and with all of the young talent we've been bringing in I'm very comfortable saying we've got the people there to replace all that we've lost and some.

RaiderNation
08-09-2008, 12:07 AM
1 Patriots
2 Cowboys
3 Colts
4 Chargers
5 Giants

21ST
08-09-2008, 01:38 AM
A homer? I'll readily admit the 'boys are better than the Eagles. But, the Giants are not.

Brandon Jacobs is one of the top power RBs in the NFL, Bradshaw is electric when in the game and Ward is arguably one of the top 3rd string RBs.
Your O-line is good.
Justin Tuck is better than Victor Abiamiri as of now. Osi and Cole are exactly even.
Your DBs are going to be great in the future. Kenny Phillips, Aaron Ross, Corey Webster and Terell Thomas are all good and will form one of the best secondaries in the NFL in the future.

I don't have my Giant Homer glasses on so therefore, I can realize that Eli Manning is average.

hold on

do you think the eagles are the 2nd best team in the divison becuase if you do you are sadly mistaken because they are last

eaglesfan_45
08-09-2008, 01:59 AM
hold on

do you think the eagles are the 2nd best team in the divison becuase if you do you are sadly mistaken because they are last

Giants and Eagles are exactly even and you should talk your team is clearly #4. Giants aren't a bad team I just don't believe they belong in the "elite-team" conversation. Redskins are #4 in the NFC east.

Gay Ork Wang
08-09-2008, 03:23 AM
Id take The Redskins over the Eagles at this moment

eaglesfan_45
08-09-2008, 03:24 AM
Could you elaborate as to why?

Mr. Stiller
08-09-2008, 04:48 AM
True, but didn't the Bus fumble on like the one? come on, how many times does THAT happen? he's not exactly early Jacobs/Tiki when it came to fumbling...

And we forget the colts wouldn't have even been in the game had the refs not overturned the Polamalu interception.

Gay Ork Wang
08-09-2008, 05:02 AM
Could you elaborate as to why?
The Redskins have not lost anyone crucial since the ending of the season. Their OL is still really good just like Portis. Their biggest weakness was the pass rush which they tried to improve with Jason Taylor. Laron Landry will be a man among boys. The CBs are getting old but Jason Campbell seems to look pretty good in that system.

The Eagles biggest weakness IMO is still their Passing Attack. They have hardly improve with just a rookie since Rookie WR is the hardest position to succeed. I could see a Ted Ginnesque Season from Desean, maybe a little better.

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 07:18 AM
the Cowboys and Giants are the clear cut top 2 in the NFC east. Anyone who doesn't see that is a iggle or skin homer OR a hater(unless you think the boys shouldn't be there ;)).

Skins and eagles are close, but i do think the skins are the 3rd best right now.

BlindSite
08-09-2008, 07:31 AM
Cowboys Giants

Eagles







Redskins

Dam8610
08-09-2008, 09:01 AM
And we forget the colts wouldn't have even been in the game had the refs not overturned the Polamalu interception.

If he didn't drop the ball, it would've been an interception.

luee
08-09-2008, 12:10 PM
I've got this question for Giants fans, three years ago, when Pittsburg won the superbowl, did you say their run was lucky? I'll bet a lot of you did, and you would be right. The same is true for the Giants this past year, they got lucky at the right time. I don't blame you for backing your team, but when its someoen else, I bet you guys have a totally different persprective.


Pitt had been a consistant play-off team long overdue, Giants have made three in a row, nothing fluke either way except Steelers refuse to pay. Giants have most of the keys resigned longterm. Just seems recently that any title not won by Pats is a fluke.

Bigburt63
08-09-2008, 12:23 PM
Pitt had been a consistant play-off team long overdue, Giants have made three in a row, nothing fluke either way except Steelers refuse to pay. Giants have most of the keys resigned longterm. Just seems recently that any title not won by Pats is a fluke.

Any time a WC team goes on a run and wins the title its always going to be considered a fluke by many, the giants even moreso because the pats were 18-0.

Bengalsrocket
08-09-2008, 01:20 PM
Any time a WC team goes on a run and wins the title its always going to be considered a fluke by many, the giants even moreso because the pats were 18-0.


The reason people are calling the giants win a fluke is because before Eli's hot streak. there were game analysts and giants fans who literally wanted Eli to be replaced - I could turn on ESPN any time on Tuesday-Friday and hear about how terrible Eli was and all the mistakes he made.

Then all the sudden, Eli plays the last game of the season against the pats, the WC game against Buccaneers, the divisional game against the Cowboys and the NFC champion game against the Packers; and he looks like he's a 10 year veteran who knows how to make any throw and take care of the ball.

The evolution of Eli Manning going from being the Giant's whipping boy and complete fall guy to being one of the Giant's more consistent players is what amazes everyone (to a point of being almost unbelievable, hence a fluke).

Disclaimer before I get people yelling at me: I don't think the Giant's winning the super bowl is a fluke. Very rarely do I think any team that made the play offs had zero chance of winning the Super bowl and this year was no different. Being lucky, or being clutch - whatever you want to call it; is part of football (and one of the most exciting parts of football) and its one of the few reasons I love our championship system (single game elimination > best of 3, 5 or 7 games).

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 01:49 PM
Don't worry, you're not being a homer at all. (cough) Maybe if it was a Top 10 list we could have Cleveland on here, but Top 5, are you serious?

We'll see after the season :)

Who would have though Cleveland would have went 10-6 last year?

Iamcanadian
08-09-2008, 01:59 PM
I'm not a Giant's fan and the SB jinx may come up and bite them this season as it has done to numerous teams in the past. However when you talk about elite teams, there really is just the Patriots anyways and then everybody else. Indy and the Giants have won 1 SB so they can clearly claim that they are serious threats based on past performance. None of the other teams can make that claim.
Sure, maybe Eli's finish in the playoffs last season was a fluke, maybe the fact that he has helped his team to 3 playoff appearances out of 4 years in the league was just another fluke as well, or just maybe he is slowly maturing into the player the Giants hoped he'd be and the Giants will dominate the NFC for awhile. We'll only know after this coming season.
As for the Eagles, well I love McNabb but face it, he has had trouble staying healthy for awhile now and injuries are hard to put aside in the NFL once they show their ugly head. If McNabb can stay healthy, they are obviously a serious challenger in the NFC, if not, they are just an average team.
As for Dallas, come back when Room proves he can win a playoff game, until then Dallas is elite only in Cowboy's fans eyes.
San Diego appears loaded and could explode this coming season but until they do they remain in the potential class as well. My self, I'm not a Turner fan and I don't think they will reach their potential under his guidance.
This are just my opinions on the teams and none of these teams do I personally support so it is pretty obvious that any homer is going to take exception but backing it up with facts that are all pure supposition really accomplishes nothing and doesn't make your team elite or close to it.

Gay Ork Wang
08-09-2008, 02:12 PM
SB Jinx = Loser not winner...

bantx
08-09-2008, 03:07 PM
We'll see after the season :)

Who would have though Cleveland would have went 10-6 last year?

yeah 10-6 just automatically makes a team elite

eaglesfan_45
08-09-2008, 05:01 PM
The Redskins have not lost anyone crucial since the ending of the season.

Neither have the Eagles

Their OL is still really good just like Portis.

Eagles OL is still really good and Westbrook >> Portis

Their biggest weakness was the pass rush which they tried to improve with Jason Taylor.

Jason Taylor will be playing out of posistion at LE when he is a RE. Also Redskins pass rush pales in comparison to the Eagles pass rush.

Laron Landry will be a man among boys.

OK, I'll give you that Eagles don't have a young potential super-star FS.

The CBs are getting old

CBs? or QBs? I'll just go with CBs. Eagles have the best defensive backfield in the NFL.

but Jason Campbell seems to look pretty good in that system.

Your Judging him off of a pre-season game? If your going to do that Donovan McNabb played a better game against a better defense.

The Eagles biggest weakness IMO is still their Passing Attack. They have hardly improve with just a rookie since Rookie WR is the hardest position to succeed. I could see a Ted Ginnesque Season from Desean, maybe a little better.

Don't under-estimate the Eagles WRs. They are comprised of a bunch of true #2 and slot guys but when the Eagles line-up in a 5 WR set, everyone is a target. No one guys is so much better than the other.
I hate to seem hipocritical, but judging DeSean off of his game against the Steelers he looked really good, he was catching passes over the middle, he did not catch one deep-ball, he was being thrown to in the flat and being forced to create YAC and he did well. He also took hits well and as Jason Avant said about him, "We have a football player on our hands.".

DMWSackMachine
08-09-2008, 05:06 PM
What a team has accomplished in the past has exactly NOTHING to do with whether they are elite or not. The ability that a team has to win football games is what decides that, thank you very much. How bout we look at the quality of the football players on each team and decide that way, eh?

Really, all we're talking about is which teams are the best teams in the league, right? And more than that, which teams are in an exclusive class above the rest of particularly impressive quality, yes? Well, lets put the Bucks up there, then, because they have won a Super Bowl and the Chargers haven't. Or the Steelers, since they have won more SBs in the last 3 years than the Patriots have. Sound reasonable? No? THAT'S BECAUSE IT ISN'T.

The quality of players on a team decides whether it is elite or not. As far as that goes, I see it this way:

1. Cowboys
2. Chargers
3. Colts
4. Pats

5-32. Everybody else

Gay Ork Wang
08-09-2008, 05:27 PM
The fact that both didnt change much plays into the favour of the Redskins though who played better last year. "The CBs are getting old" was concerning the Redskins CBs.
Its close but I still think based on last years performance and no real big changes on both teams (okay the Playbook might be alittle problem, but a coaching change is cant really be predicted), if i had to chose one now, id pick the Redskins

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 06:02 PM
What a team has accomplished in the past has exactly NOTHING to do with whether they are elite or not. The ability that a team has to win football games is what decides that, thank you very much. How bout we look at the quality of the football players on each team and decide that way, eh?

Really, all we're talking about is which teams are the best teams in the league, right? And more than that, which teams are in an exclusive class above the rest of particularly impressive quality, yes? Well, lets put the Bucks up there, then, because they have won a Super Bowl and the Chargers haven't. Or the Steelers, since they have won more SBs in the last 3 years than the Patriots have. Sound reasonable? No? THAT'S BECAUSE IT ISN'T.

The quality of players on a team decides whether it is elite or not. As far as that goes, I see it this way:

1. Cowboys
2. Chargers
3. Colts
4. Pats

5-32. Everybody else

Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in more than a decade, how the **** are they the most elite?

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 06:05 PM
The reason people are calling the giants win a fluke is because before Eli's hot streak. there were game analysts and giants fans who literally wanted Eli to be replaced - I could turn on ESPN any time on Tuesday-Friday and hear about how terrible Eli was and all the mistakes he made.



those so called Giants fans also went out and bought Tyree jerseys thinking he's an awesome WR. what they don't know is, he may be cut. I hate the majority of "Giants fans".

When someone tells me they're a Giants fan, I test them. pretty douche move, but it's fake fans that grind my gears to the max

Dam8610
08-09-2008, 06:08 PM
Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in more than a decade, how the **** are they the most elite?

The screenname on that post is very telling.

Im_a_Romosexual
08-09-2008, 08:04 PM
Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in more than a decade, how the **** are they the most elite?

The past doesn't matter for this upcoming season.

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 08:05 PM
The past doesn't matter for this upcoming season.

uhm, the title "elite" would infer that, yes.

Best team for next year is a WHOLE different topic. Elite infers the past few years and perhaps the next few...

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:06 PM
yeah 10-6 just automatically makes a team elite

I never said they were elite last year, I said I think this year they will be one of the top 5 teams in the league.

Learn to read.

Are you going to argue with the Browns offense which is Joe Thomas, Eric Steinbach, Fraley, Tucker, Shaffer, Lewis, Vickers, Winslow, Edwards, Stallworth, Anderson.

One of the best special teams units in the game headed off by Josh Cribbs.

And a revamped defense that added Rogers/Williams?

Like I said, I think the Browns will be top 5 this year and have the talent to do so.

I don't care if they were 10-6 last year, I didn't know that how teams will do in 2008 was only based off of 2007.

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 08:08 PM
I never said they were elite last year, I said I think this year they will be one of the top 5 teams in the league.

Learn to read.

YOU learn to read. This is the "ELITE" teams, top 5; not the "top 5 teams for next year" holy ****

Im_a_Romosexual
08-09-2008, 08:10 PM
uhm, the title "elite" would infer that, yes.

Best team for next year is a WHOLE different topic. Elite infers the past few years and perhaps the next few...

I was thinking this thread was about the top 5 teams for this season, anything that happened 5,10, or 100 years ago doesn't mean **** for 2008.

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 08:11 PM
I was thinking this thread was about the top 5 teams for this season, anything that happened 5,10, or 100 years ago means **** for 2008.

of course, but this is elite, which takes from the past few years, in which the Cowboys haven't won a playoff game. Which is why I called out them being the most "elite" team

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:12 PM
uhm, the title "elite" would infer that, yes.

Best team for next year is a WHOLE different topic. Elite infers the past few years and perhaps the next few...

So lets say the Patriots lost Samuel, Moss, and Brady some how went down with an injury... Just because they were good the past few seasons you would still say they were elite?

Correct me if im mistaken, but shouldn't the top 5 elite teams mean the top 5 teams for this year, I don't give a **** if a team was good the last 60 years if they had a **** roster and went 0-16 this year I wouldn't consider them elite.

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:13 PM
YOU learn to read. This is the "ELITE" teams, top 5; not the "top 5 teams for next year" holy ****

It all depends on how you interpret the word elite ass hole.

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:15 PM
http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/elite

elite
One entry found.

elite[noun]

Entry Word:
elite
Function:
noun

Text: individuals carefully selected as being the best of a class <the winners of this science award represent the elite of our high schools>

Synonyms best

"Elite" teams, your top five

OR

"Best" teams, your top five

There is some English 101 for you pal.

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 08:15 PM
It all depends on how you interpret the word elite ass hole.

absolutely not. Elite is infered to be top for the last couple of years and this upcoming year. BEST is for this coming year. Not that hard to understand. The Browns shouldn't have been mentioned in this thread at all unless there's an "lolz, jk" next to them

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:21 PM
absolutely not. Elite is infered to be top for the last couple of years and this upcoming year. BEST is for this coming year. Not that hard to understand. The Browns shouldn't have been mentioned in this thread at all unless there's an "lolz, jk" next to them

You're too stupid to have a conversation with apparently if you're trying to tell me what a team did for the past few years makes them elite for this year. You just keep thinking that elite only means over a period of time, because the thread starter even says that he sees 5 teams that can compete for THIS YEARS title. He didn't say "Oh well the Patriots were good the past 5 years which means they are elite this year" He says that he sees 5 teams that are good this year that can compete this year.

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:23 PM
Heres a definition of elite for you if you want to keep arguing.

b. The best or most skilled members of a group: the football team's elite.

Notice how it says "The most SKILLED members of a group" as in PRESENT tense.

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 08:24 PM
You're too stupid to have a conversation with apparently if you're trying to tell me what a team did for the past few years makes them elite for this year. You just keep thinking that elite only means over a period of time, because the thread starter even says that he sees 5 teams that can compete for THIS YEARS title. He didn't say "Oh well the Patriots were good the past 5 years which means they are elite this year" He says that he sees 5 teams that are good this year that can compete this year.

ok, obviously we've been talking through out this whole thread ABOUT THE PAST and what teams have done, so there's that.

2: what makes the Browns elite this year? wtf have they done? god, a team wins 10 games for the first time in like 20 years, and they're fans think they're the ****.

and I'm stupid? you're the Browns fan!

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:31 PM
ok, obviously we've been talking through out this whole thread ABOUT THE PAST and what teams have done, so there's that.

2: what makes the Browns elite this year? wtf have they done? god, a team wins 10 games for the first time in like 20 years, and they're fans think they're the ****.

and I'm stupid? you're the Browns fan!

So because you're a Giants fan your king **** huh? What if the fluke that was the Giants post-season last year didn't happen, lets say the Cowboys don't choke or Tyree doesn't make a ******* miracle catch, are you still gonna sit here and talk like your team is special?

I never talked **** about anyone elses team or anything, I told you why I think the Browns will be a top 5 team this year, our offensive line, receivers/tight end, running back, quarterback, fullback are plenty of reasons, those reason I listed right there are the entire ******* offense.

Then you go to special teams and you have one of the top 3 returners in the league, a solid kicker and a decent punter, not to mention a great coverage team.

Then you go to the defense which was easily the weakness, I see no reason why Rogers/Williams won't improve our defense.

You're being a dumbass again on why the Browns can't be good this year, you're saying because they sucked the years prior to last year means they can't do good... Look around buddy, just because your Giants won the super bowl last year doesn't mean they get a free pass to the Super Bowl this year...

Maybe it will hit you when you get to watch a certain Monday Night game on October 13th and your pass rush gets stopped by one of the leagues best offensive lines and you get passed on for over 300 yards and you finally realize "Oh ****, maybe that's why he think's they're going to be a top 5 team."

scottyboy
08-09-2008, 08:34 PM
So because you're a Giants fan your king **** huh? What if the fluke that was the Giants post-season last year didn't happen, lets say the Cowboys don't choke or Tyree doesn't make a ******* miracle catch, are you still gonna sit here and talk like your team is special?

I never talked **** about anyone elses team or anything, I told you why I think the Browns will be a top 5 team this year, our offensive line, receivers/tight end, running back, quarterback, fullback are plenty of reasons, those reason I listed right there are the entire ******* offense.

Then you go to special teams and you have one of the top 3 returners in the league, a solid kicker and a decent punter, not to mention a great coverage team.

Then you go to the defense which was easily the weakness, I see no reason why Rogers/Williams won't improve our defense.

You're being a dumbass again on why the Browns can't be good this year, you're saying because they sucked the years prior to last year means they can't do good... Look around buddy, just because your Giants won the super bowl last year doesn't mean they get a free pass to the Super Bowl this year...

Maybe it will hit you when you get to watch a certain Monday Night game on October 13th and your pass rush gets stopped by one of the leagues best offensive lines and you get passed on for over 300 yards and you finally realize "Oh ****, maybe that's why he think's they're going to be a top 5 team."

nice, calling the Giants season a fluke and calling me a dumbass. Signs of defeat. well done.

if you READ the thread, people have been talking about the past few years and not just next year. note how all the teams mentioned in this thread have been good for the past 4 years or so AND this year, except the Browns...go figure

eaglesfan_45
08-09-2008, 08:34 PM
I think it is a little of recent past and present, I mean you can't put the Dolphins in the "elite teams" because they haven't done **** the past few years. Then you have to look at who's got the most talent.

I Just Realized I haven't posted a list-

1. New England- this is a given they're the class of the NFL, the meaning of Elite, 3 superbowls this decade.

2. Colts- they have been one of the best teams in the NFL with Peyton Manning at QB and I see no reason for that to stop. Won a superbowl 2 years ago.

3. Cowboys- They have yet to win a playoff game in about 10 years, but they are one of the most talented teams and are the class of the NFC.

4. Chargers- Are one of the most talented teams in the NFL and are a force, they are primed for a superbowl victory soon. Phillip Rivers is a good QB and they have an elite RB in Tomlinson and a top-notch o-line. The defense is as good as they come.

5. None- There is no 5th elite team after those 4 you get into the very good team range that has teams like the Steelers, Browns, Giants, Jaguars, Saints and Vikings.

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:38 PM
if you READ the thread, people have been talking about the past few years and not just next year. note how all the teams mentioned in this thread have been good for the past 4 years or so AND this year, except the Browns...go figure[/color]

Once again, I don't care what other people consider elite or what people have done in the past. I don't care what people have said in the thread either.

All I care about is that the top 5 "elite" or "best" teams for this year.

I think the Browns happen to be one of the top 5 teams for this year.

Last time I checked you don't get credit for games in 2005, 2006, 2007 in the year 2008, maybe this a new rule I have not been made aware of...

Also, did you ever happen to think that the elite teams that happen to have been good in the past are also going to be good this year, maybe thats why they are listed in elite teams for THIS year because they are expected to do GOOD this year???

Hmmmm...

PACKmanN
08-09-2008, 08:41 PM
You're too stupid to have a conversation with apparently if you're trying to tell me what a team did for the past few years makes them elite for this year. You just keep thinking that elite only means over a period of time, because the thread starter even says that he sees 5 teams that can compete for THIS YEARS title. He didn't say "Oh well the Patriots were good the past 5 years which means they are elite this year" He says that he sees 5 teams that are good this year that can compete this year.
If you don't consider what teams or players for that matter did last year, you wouldn't even think of the top 5 teams. Teams like the Pats, Colts, and Chargers will continue their success. It would be continued because they haven't lost important/valuable pieces to their puzzle and added players that would improve their roster.

The Browns are not elite because they haven't reached the Playoffs, and you can't fully judge a team just on additions alone. If so, the 49ers would have been consider elite 2 years ago when they added players threw free agency.

Hines
08-09-2008, 08:44 PM
So because you're a Giants fan your king **** huh? What if the fluke that was the Giants post-season last year didn't happen, lets say the Cowboys don't choke or Tyree doesn't make a ******* miracle catch, are you still gonna sit here and talk like your team is special?

I never talked **** about anyone elses team or anything, I told you why I think the Browns will be a top 5 team this year, our offensive line, receivers/tight end, running back, quarterback, fullback are plenty of reasons, those reason I listed right there are the entire ******* offense.

Then you go to special teams and you have one of the top 3 returners in the league, a solid kicker and a decent punter, not to mention a great coverage team.

Then you go to the defense which was easily the weakness, I see no reason why Rogers/Williams won't improve our defense.

You're being a dumbass again on why the Browns can't be good this year, you're saying because they sucked the years prior to last year means they can't do good... Look around buddy, just because your Giants won the super bowl last year doesn't mean they get a free pass to the Super Bowl this year...

Maybe it will hit you when you get to watch a certain Monday Night game on October 13th and your pass rush gets stopped by one of the leagues best offensive lines and you get passed on for over 300 yards and you finally realize "Oh ****, maybe that's why he think's they're going to be a top 5 team."




So one game makes you elite? I am not going to get into this, but I honestly see Anderson as a one year wonder. He does have great surrounding talent, but what if he messes up? The defense is good ON PAPER. I like Williams and Rogers, but Williams never played in a 34, and Rogers is a lazy fat ass who doesnt play hard most of the time. Plus you are thin at corner in which teams like Pittsburgh, Indy and New England will spread out that defense and exploit the lack of depth at corner that you have. You also need another pass rusher. Dont give me bull about Antwaan Peek anymore. He isnt scary and is not a threat. Teams will continue to double Wimbley. You guys have an elite OFFENSE, but an elite TEAM, I am not sure. You will make the playoffs though, I just dont think it is a top 5 team just yet.

My top 5 teams:

Patriots
Colts
Cowboys
Chargers
Steelers/Giants/Saints/Vikings/Jaguars

Yes I did include the Vikings because I think Tavares breaks out this year, and proves why he is the starter for a NFL franchise. He has a dominate defense and playmakers on the offense. Plus, one of the best left sides in football protecting him.

If the Saints prove they can be good on defense, and I think the additions of Vilma, Shockey, Porter, Ellis, and Pressley will help, they will be in the championship game IMO.


The Giants have a good team still coming back. Eli has a good offensive line, and they improved his recievers. Bradshaw, Ward, and Jacobs are a load as running backs, and I think Tuck will be an instant upgrade to that defense. The back 4 is question, but I like Ross and Phillips.


The Steelers have issues on that offensive line, but I liked how they played last night. The first team that is. Plus, we have three really good playmaking running backs, 4 deep at WR, Spaeth and Miller are instant red zone threats, Woodley and Timmons coming in and helping out are already number 1 defense. I hope it all works out.

I like the Jags, I just think Gerrard wont have AS GOOD of a season. I believe he is a good quarterback, but I dont think Williamson will improve the recieving corps. Groves and Harvey will improve the monster defense and I think Nelson will improve in his sophmore season.

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:51 PM
So one game makes you elite?

If I expected the Browns to only beat one team then I wouldn't consider them top 5 ;)

I am not going to get into this, but I honestly see Anderson as a one year wonder. He does have great surrounding talent, but what if he messes up?

I already said that the biggest determining factor is if Anderson can improve on last year, I believe he will, which is why I believe we will be a top 5 team this year.

The defense is good ON PAPER. I like Williams and Rogers, but Williams never played in a 34, and Rogers is a lazy fat ass who doesnt play hard most of the time. Plus you are thin at corner in which teams like Pittsburgh, Indy and New England will spread out that defense and exploit the lack of depth at corner that you have.

I agree and disagree, our defense is thin at corner but from what I've seen Wright/McDonald should be solid, after that is where we will have trouble. I hate saying stuff like this, but Rogers has looked absolutely amazing in camp and has been amazing in the weight room from what I've heard, hopefully it shows up during the regular season.

You also need another pass rusher. Dont give me bull about Antwaan Peek anymore. He isnt scary and is not a threat. Teams will continue to double Wimbley. You guys have an elite OFFENSE, but an elite TEAM, I am not sure. You will make the playoffs though, I just dont think it is a top 5 team just yet.

Patriots
Colts
Cowboys
Chargers
Steelers/Giants/Saints/Vikings/Jaguars


Our offense is elite and our special teams is top 5, if our defense picks it up to anywhere around 10-15 in the league then we should be a team to be reckoned with easily.

You don't think the Browns belong up there with the Steelers/Giants/Saints/Vikings/Jaguars?

We'll see in the season, but I think Cleveland and Pittsburgh will develop 2 amazing games to watch this year...

Can't wait man!

PoopSandwich
08-09-2008, 08:54 PM
If you don't consider what teams or players for that matter did last year, you wouldn't even think of the top 5 teams.

Of course, I agree with what you say here, but you establish building blocks through whats happened in the past...

We know what teams have talent, and based off of additions and departures that effect various teams you should be able to make a prediction on what happens the following year.

I'm just saying that I think the Browns will be one of the top 5 teams in the league this year... I'm not saying that after last years season they are top 5, I'm saying that after last years season, one more year with our offense under our belt, a new defensive coordinator and additions on offense and defense allow me to believe that we will be top 5...

We could also bomb and go 5-11, who knows, thats why they play the game.

RoyHall#1
08-09-2008, 10:18 PM
I was under the impression that we were ranking teams just on how they would do this coming year. All of the discussion of past years related to the coming year. If we were including the last few years no one in their right mind would have NE anywhere but 1st, which many people have had.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
08-10-2008, 12:34 AM
Scotty, this is elite teams, not elite franchises. Elite teams mean, who are the best teams. And because the OP made no designation, I'm pretty sure everyone is assuming he means for this upcoming season.

PACKmanN
08-10-2008, 03:01 AM
Of course, I agree with what you say here, but you establish building blocks through whats happened in the past...

We know what teams have talent, and based off of additions and departures that effect various teams you should be able to make a prediction on what happens the following year.

I'm just saying that I think the Browns will be one of the top 5 teams in the league this year... I'm not saying that after last years season they are top 5, I'm saying that after last years season, one more year with our offense under our belt, a new defensive coordinator and additions on offense and defense allow me to believe that we will be top 5...

We could also bomb and go 5-11, who knows, thats why they play the game.
addations never always lead to positives. It depends on the stage of the player career and type of scheme the player will be playing under.

awfullyquiet
08-10-2008, 11:26 AM
sounds like someone needs a ride on the waaaahmublance.

StrongSide97
08-10-2008, 11:28 AM
You guys are pathetic...that's all

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 01:05 PM
You guys are pathetic...that's all

And who, may I ask, the bloody hell are you?

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 01:06 PM
sounds like someone needs a ride on the waaaahmublance.

Do they serve waaaaahmburgers in it?

Trivia
08-10-2008, 02:06 PM
Teams with guys that have just one more TD pass in the NFL than i do are NOT elite.

1. Patriots
2. Cowboys
3. Chargers
4. Colts
5. Jacksonville

agreed
thats wat i think as well

NY+Giants=NYG
08-10-2008, 03:40 PM
Excuse me? You didn't just seriously say that, did you?

Look, I like parts of the Giants team a lot. Love your stable of DEs, naturally. I like the cohesion and intensity that your line brings every Sunday. I like the way your RB rotation performs when everything is clicking.

But to say you didn't lose key people!! Two years ago at this time, any Giant fan worth his salt would have listed Strahan, Shockey, Tiki, and Osi as your 4 best players. Now? Three of those players are gone. Don't tell me you haven't lost key players. You lost possibly your best single offensive player and DEFINITELY your best defensive player, as well as the elder statesman and #1 leader of the team.

Can they overcome it? It is possible, true, but if you're talking about probability I would say it isn't great that they will.

As far as this "Look! They won the Super Bowl!1" reasoning....Since when does a SB championship guarantee anything for the next year? Let's take a look at the last few wild card teams that have come out of nowhere to win a Super Bowl and how they performed the following season:

2005 Pittsburgh Steelers:

SB Season: 11-5
Seeded: 6th
Story: A mind boggling series of events including possibly the brightest young QB in the league blowing his knee out on the 2nd play from scrimmage in the 1st round, followed by one of the great upsets in NFL history against the Colts featuring "The Tackle" by Big Ben and a last minute missed FG by one of the best FG kickers in league history. This team never looked like a juggernaut until the AFC Champ game when they dismantled a very good Denver team. Went on to win the ugliest Super Bowl in my lifetime.
Following year: 2006 record 8-8
Story: Most would blame the offseason trouble with Big Ben for what happened, but a defense that had been perennially in the top of the league dropped off dramatically. Key defections on offense (Randle El, Bettis) and the ongoing Roethlisberger saga made this one of the most inefficient and TO prone Steelers teams ever.

2000 Baltimore Ravens:

SB season: 12-4
Seeded: 4th
Story: A team that dominated defensively all year long took it to a whole different level in the playoffs. Led by a no-mistakes QB who played within himself and a bruising running game featuring Jamal Lewis, this team finished the season on a 7 game winning streak after starting the season 5-4. A weird playoffs that pitted them against the two AFC favorites for the SB--Oakland and Tennessee--showed a team that had become an all-time defensive power, shutting down the vaunted Oakland passing attack (167 yards, 3 points) by first limiting Rich Gannon and then knocking him out of the game. In the Super Bowl, they ran into a similar Cinderalla Giants team who, unfortunately, had been more bark than bite in making it to the big game.
Following year: 2001 record 10-6
Story: The defection of Trent Dilfer hurt the team, though many thought they had upgraded by bringing in Elvis Grbac. Jamal Lewis blows his knee out in TC, and it certainly hurts, but it may not have been such a big deal had they not allowed a certain undrafted RB from Texas by the name of Priest Holmes to leave. The defense was basically as suffocating as ever, and the pass rush was actually significantly improved from the year before, notching 45 sacks compared to 35 by the SB team. All around, though, just not a good enough team to hang with the real power players in the NFL.

Also, though the 2001 NE Pats weren't a wild card team, they fit the profile extremely well. Finishing 11-5 after starting the season 5-5, they spent the whole year winning games by the skin of their teeth. Eventually, due to a down year by the AFC, they were able to secure the #2 spot in the conference despite finishing just 11-5. Everyone knows the story from there on out. The Tuck Rule game, followed by one of the all-time choke jobs by the Steelers and Kordell Stewart, and culminating in the SB vs. the Rams.

The next year, however, they bumbled their way to a 9-7 record (while still nearly winning the division...:O) as all the breaks that went their way the year before turned on them. They didn't really have any serious defections in terms of personnel, either--though I can't remember if they had any serious injuries. They just weren't that good...and they got exposed as such.


The point is, in the NFL certain things happen, breaks go the right way for you, and it can make a team look much better (or much worse) than they really are. No one can take the 2007 Super Bowl victory away from the Giants, even if they wanted to--which I, personally would never do, it was one of the greatest non-Cowboy football moments of my lifetime--but that doesn't mean we have to pretend they are better than they really are. They didn't win during the playoffs in particularly impressive fashion. They just got some breaks, and played with so much heart that they were able to be in position to exploit those breaks. They are still a team with a mediocre QB, suspect LBs, a porous secondary, middling interior DL play and very few top-tier players at the skill positions. They will have a fight on their hands to make the playoffs. Just like all the other "out of nowhere" teams that have won a SB.





Funny how now since we lost him people say he is a "key" person, but when we had him everyone called him old. I love the irony by those who stated that. People thought our D line was ok, before this year, and mentioned Osi, but put Strahan in the old category, on the decline. And that's coming from OUR very own NFC East rival fans!! But now that he is gone, all of a sudden we have this huge void that no one else can fill. We have Tuck, who is no hall of famer, but will continue to get better. And we signed Wynn, drafted a DE, and another young DE getting reps and impressing. Again stop talking players when it comes to our team, and look at the team as a whole. we are coaching guys to all work together and continue production as a unit. People said we'd be a top 10 pick without tiki, yet with all our RBs we replaced our production. I expect us to do the same again this year.

I understand your point, and you make a valid arguement but my point we are getting better! It's not like we are losing players and our window is closing. It's not even open yet. We got rid of two bad coordinators to get where we are, and Eli has started to play better under Gilbride too, which culminated to the highest point last season. I wouldn't call him an avg QB. Qbs don't do what they do did last season when called upon, and that goes beyond the stats. I expect him to get better now under Gilbride and Chris plamer our QB coach.

We lost Wilson, and signed Knight, and drafted KP, who by all reports, is tearing it up in camp, and looks like he may just start in the first game if he keeps this up. Again, the NFC East will be battle, but one thing we have on our side is our team chemistry. We are a typical blue collar team, with no superstars like yours, but we get it done. And at the end of the day, I will take that any time. So it will be interesting to see if this team can come out and be hungry like last year.

DMWSackMachine
08-10-2008, 04:19 PM
The screenname on that post is very telling.

Are you questioning my credibility because I'm a 'Boys fan? If so, it would be nice to hear a rebuttal that includes actual evidence as to why what I'm saying is FOS.

Also, if you knew a damn thing about me, you would realize that I am the last one in the world to over-estimate my team. This team has had to show me a lot before I was willing to buy into them as a legit contender. Before last season I was questioning whether or not we would make the playoffs, and predicted, iirc, a 10-6 record for the season. I don't hype just to hype.

All I'm saying in this thread is that the Cowboys are as loaded with talent for this season as any team I have ever seen since I've been watching the NFL. Of course its a little suspect coming from a 'Boys fan, but if you took a close look, you would realize that its true. There's a reason that we ranked among the best at every position in the positional rankings that Scouts Inc put out last month. 6th QB, 5th RB, 8th WR, 2nd TE, 2nd OL, 6th DL, 1st LB and 1st DBs. Just as a quick reference, here are the other 3 elite teams and their rankings:

Team.....QB...RB...WR...TE...OL...DL...LB....DB
DAL........6.....5.....8.....2.....2.....6....1... ...1
SD.........14....1.....9.....1.....6.....8....2... ...4
NE.........1.....19....1.....15....4....3.....3... ..19
Ind.........2.....8.....5.....6.....5....14...14.. ...5


As you can see, Dallas fares extremely well in every phase of the game. There's no weakness, although I do think we ranked a little high on the DL--no way we should be above SD, who I think has arguably the best group in the league--and a little too low in WR--its laughable to see us at 8 and SD, who has no go-to threat, at #9--and possibly QB.

But even if one questions the credibility of these rankings, which is certainly valid considering some of the poor content ESPN puts out these days, this still illuminates an undeniable point. SD and Dallas are the two best teams in the league because they lack any real point of weakness. The thing that puts Dallas above SD in my mind is QB play, where Romo is clearly better than Rivers, and the fact that TO presents a much more formidable #1 passing option than SD can boast, Gates' amazing ability not withstanding.

Indy and NE are both dealing with serious holes in their defenses. The Colts always lack heft on the DL, but recently Freeney hasn't been his old self, and now their LB corps has failed to produce young playmakers like they have in the past. The Pats got an extremely favorable grade for their secondary, given the fact that they lost their only above average player (unless you still think Harrison qualifies, which is a good laugh in itself) and are dealing with a bunch of no-talent-having vets, has beens, and unproven young players. They are probably in the 25-30 range in reality. Their TEs and RB, likewise, are less than impressive.

My point overall, though, is that these teams are the cream of the crop, and Dallas is (though by a very thin margin) at the head of that crop simply due to the quality of their players. People are sucked into their own teams' training camps right now, and thus are less aware of what other teams are doing, and that's fine. That is what pre season and TC are all about.

Unfortunately, though, the sun always rises, and then you are forced to look at the quality of your players by the harsh light of day. When that happens, people will be talking about the special team that Dallas has assembled for this year. Just last night Jamie Dukes was raving about it on the NFLN. Scouts Inc and PFW have also noticed. This is not the typical fanboy raving about FA or late round picks that are tearing up training camp. This is a team that is so loaded that I feel compelled to get on the record right now, just so that when the storm breaks everyone here can't say "wow, nobody saw this coming".

I encourage everyone who is a fan of great football to really take a hard look at the Cowboys' roster and then argue with me.

If you think that they will have trouble with leadership and poise during the playoffs...ok, there's no way to argue that but saying "wait and see". But if you don't think they are the most talented team in the league, you're just plain wrong.

bantx
08-10-2008, 04:26 PM
I just dont know how u can call a team elite when they havnt made the playoffs , and just because u add some new players in the offseason that may look good on paper they havnt proved to be an elite team. So calling a team an elite team without seeing them play at the elite level is dumb.

Bigburt63
08-10-2008, 04:32 PM
Funny how now since we lost him people say he is a "key" person, but when we had him everyone called him old. I love the irony by those who stated that. People thought our D line was ok, before this year, and mentioned Osi, but put Strahan in the old category, on the decline. And that's coming from OUR very own NFC East rival fans!! But now that he is gone, all of a sudden we have this huge void that no one else can fill. We have Tuck, who is no hall of famer, but will continue to get better. And we signed Wynn, drafted a DE, and another young DE getting reps and impressing. Again stop talking players when it comes to our team, and look at the team as a whole. we are coaching guys to all work together and continue production as a unit. People said we'd be a top 10 pick without tiki, yet with all our RBs we replaced our production. I expect us to do the same again this year.

I understand your point, and you make a valid arguement but my point we are getting better! It's not like we are losing players and our window is closing. It's not even open yet. We got rid of two bad coordinators to get where we are, and Eli has started to play better under Gilbride too, which culminated to the highest point last season. I wouldn't call him an avg QB. Qbs don't do what they do did last season when called upon, and that goes beyond the stats. I expect him to get better now under Gilbride and Chris plamer our QB coach.

We lost Wilson, and signed Knight, and drafted KP, who by all reports, is tearing it up in camp, and looks like he may just start in the first game if he keeps this up. Again, the NFC East will be battle, but one thing we have on our side is our team chemistry. We are a typical blue collar team, with no superstars like yours, but we get it done. And at the end of the day, I will take that any time. So it will be interesting to see if this team can come out and be hungry like last year.

by the same token, its funny how many of the people who were saying that strahan is not on the decline and is still a stud, are now saying that he can be replaced seamlessly with tuck.

As for the giants, i see alot of the 2001 patriots in them, getting hot at the right time, making an improbable championship run, even though they are the less talented team (note: they were the best team on super sunday, can't take anything away from them). however, the pats missed the playoffs the next year, they couldnt sustain the level of success. I could see the same happening for the giants, not miss the playoffs necessarily, but not superbowl run. for me, they havent maintained a high level of success to be considered elite yet, but the possibility is always there

PoopSandwich
08-10-2008, 04:33 PM
I just dont know how u can call a team elite when they havnt made the playoffs , and just because u add some new players in the offseason that may look good on paper they havnt proved to be an elite team. So calling a team an elite team without seeing them play at the elite level is dumb.

Dude, I said I think they will be one of the top 5 teams in the league this year, I'm not saying they have been amazing in the past, and they may as well stink it up this year. I am however saying that I think they will be one of the top 5 teams in the league by the end of this year...

People get stuck on the past too much.

NY+Giants=NYG
08-10-2008, 04:38 PM
by the same token, its funny how many of the people who were saying that strahan is not on the decline and is still a stud, are now saying that he can be replaced seamlessly with tuck.

As for the giants, i see alot of the 2001 patriots in them, getting hot at the right time, making an improbable championship run, even though they are the less talented team (note: they were the best team on super sunday, can't take anything away from them). however, the pats missed the playoffs the next year, they couldnt sustain the level of success. I could see the same happening for the giants, not miss the playoffs necessarily, but not superbowl run. for me, they havent maintained a high level of success to be considered elite yet, but the possibility is always there


Yeah that's a mistake too by our fans and others if they thought that. He did lose a step or 3, and had to lose weight to compensate for the injury and his increasing age. That helped him most recently play to a good level. I would say he is a level above avg, so I define that as good. Not a pro bowler, but still stout against the run, and can get a sack on ya, if you stick a younger inexperienced guy on him.

Yeah I doubt the possibility of not making the playoffs, but we are consistently adding talent, and our window is just starting to open. We also are making the right free agent moves, and drafting much better than in the Accorsi era, and that's because of Reese.

All I am saying is I like the future for this blue collar team. No one flashy or "famous" really, except maybe Osi, who is the lone pro bowler, but I like how this whole team competes. I will take that chemistry, and our coaching staff's ability to work hard in preparing for any team. And then let the chips fall as they may.

DMWSackMachine
08-10-2008, 04:39 PM
Funny how now since we lost him people say he is a "key" person, but when we had him everyone called him old. I love the irony by those who stated that. People thought our D line was ok, before this year, and mentioned Osi, but put Strahan in the old category, on the decline. And that's coming from OUR very own NFC East rival fans!! But now that he is gone, all of a sudden we have this huge void that no one else can fill. We have Tuck, who is no hall of famer, but will continue to get better. And we signed Wynn, drafted a DE, and another young DE getting reps and impressing. Again stop talking players when it comes to our team, and look at the team as a whole. we are coaching guys to all work together and continue production as a unit. People said we'd be a top 10 pick without tiki, yet with all our RBs we replaced our production. I expect us to do the same again this year.

I understand your point, and you make a valid arguement but my point we are getting better! It's not like we are losing players and our window is closing. It's not even open yet. We got rid of two bad coordinators to get where we are, and Eli has started to play better under Gilbride too, which culminated to the highest point last season. I wouldn't call him an avg QB. Qbs don't do what they do did last season when called upon, and that goes beyond the stats. I expect him to get better now under Gilbride and Chris plamer our QB coach.

We lost Wilson, and signed Knight, and drafted KP, who by all reports, is tearing it up in camp, and looks like he may just start in the first game if he keeps this up. Again, the NFC East will be battle, but one thing we have on our side is our team chemistry. We are a typical blue collar team, with no superstars like yours, but we get it done. And at the end of the day, I will take that any time. So it will be interesting to see if this team can come out and be hungry like last year.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate what you did last year, and I appreciate the way you got it done, more than anything.

Still, to say you didn't lose any key players is simply not true. Shockey was, at the very least, one of the better TEs in the league. Last year all your boys were talking him up as being right there after Gates for 2nd best TE in the L, and now all of a sudden losing him is going to be a positive?! Talk about irony.

For the record, I was one of those that thought Strahan was old and wouldn't help you last year. I was wrong. Is that good enough for you? The dude was playing at a Pro Bowl level, and it shocked the hell out of me. In fact, I would strongly argue that he was much better in 2007 than he was in 2006, which is quite strange for a guy that old. So I'll come clean on that. However, while I will be the first to admit the quality that you have developed along the DL, or really with your DEs, don't think for a second that you will just ride along merrily without feeling his loss. At the very least, his character and leadership will leave a big void.

Lastly, though, and this is my point. If you look at the history of the NFL, you will see that in the vast majority of the seasons, the team who wins the Super Bowl usually comes from a pool of 3 or 4 teams who have distinguished themselves throughout the regular season. By the time the playoffs come, we know who the best teams are, and one of those teams usually takes the cake. However, every 5 years or so we see a team rise from obscurity to win it all in very unlikely fashion. That team rarely contends for the Lombardi the following year. The Giants were a great story last year, and my gratitude to them for stopping the Pats has no end, but all that doesn't guarantee anything for this year. They still have the same roster (actually, an arguably worse one) that struggled to make the playoffs last year. If they are going to take a step up into the category of the elite, they are going to need some of their players to make some serious improvement.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:40 PM
I'd say Eli is fairly famous.

PoopSandwich
08-10-2008, 04:41 PM
I'd say Eli is fairly famous.

Yeah hes kind of a big deal around here, people know him.

NY+Giants=NYG
08-10-2008, 04:51 PM
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate what you did last year, and I appreciate the way you got it done, more than anything.

Still, to say you didn't lose any key players is simply not true. Shockey was, at the very least, one of the better TEs in the league. Last year all your boys were talking him up as being right there after Gates for 2nd best TE in the L, and now all of a sudden losing him is going to be a positive?! Talk about irony.

For the record, I was one of those that thought Strahan was old and wouldn't help you last year. I was wrong. Is that good enough for you? The dude was playing at a Pro Bowl level, and it shocked the hell out of me. In fact, I would strongly argue that he was much better in 2007 than he was in 2006, which is quite strange for a guy that old. So I'll come clean on that. However, while I will be the first to admit the quality that you have developed along the DL, or really with your DEs, don't think for a second that you will just ride along merrily without feeling his loss. At the very least, his character and leadership will leave a big void.

Lastly, though, and this is my point. If you look at the history of the NFL, you will see that in the vast majority of the seasons, the team who wins the Super Bowl usually comes from a pool of 3 or 4 teams who have distinguished themselves throughout the regular season. By the time the playoffs come, we know who the best teams are, and one of those teams usually takes the cake. However, every 5 years or so we see a team rise from obscurity to win it all in very unlikely fashion. That team rarely contends for the Lombardi the following year. The Giants were a great story last year, and my gratitude to them for stopping the Pats has no end, but all that doesn't guarantee anything for this year. They still have the same roster (actually, an arguably worse one) that struggled to make the playoffs last year. If they are going to take a step up into the category of the elite, they are going to need some of their players to make some serious improvement.


Again, I can't control my boys just like you can't contro some of your fans and some of the dumb things they say. But that's not only them either, same with redskin fans and Eagles fans. That's all fan bases. I don't pay much attention to stuff like that, even when our own fan base says it. I just read it, and just in one ear and out the other.

I always fought in saying Shockey is the true talent we lost. Not as much as the media will carry on stating Wilson, Mitchell, and Torbor. They try to pain the picture like those guys were pillars on our team, in their respective units.

In my opinion, Shockey, right now in his career, for us provided more value than Strahan. Strahan brought leadership, and had good skills for his age, but Shockey's run blocking was amazing for us. That the driving force for our whole offense, AND our bread and butter play on our running game was centered around him, and the TE position. So he actually provided more of a loss to this team. We may be a better TEAM without him, but we are NOT a better offense.

As for Strahan, I wasn't alluding to you, but props for coming out with it. I was just speaking in general from the different message boards, when Strahan was brought in the conversation. "Dude he is old, and on the decline" Or I wouldn't want him on this team, he has nothing left.


Now for the future, we need to have our TE, Boss, or Johnson, and perhaps Mathews to step up. If Boss can learn how to run block, then I think we will be fine, if not, I'd expect moe 4 wide sets, and perhaps more ISO and Lead runs, which would mean a "back to the drawing board" type mentality. If that happens then god knows what we can expect. That would make things interesting I guess. Everyone is stating Strahan and leadership, that intangible element, that perhaps is a void, but again, we don't have pro bowlers or flashy guys. We are a blue collar team, who has the TEAM concept and element. While people may focus on Strahan's intangibles that will be missed, let's not forget this team is a true team in every sense of the word. And now they are battle tested, in big situations. I am not saying we may make the playoffs, but I personally expect us to be competing day in and day out, and I expect us to make the playoffs, unless something goes wrong. But that's my personal expectation. I am not thinking repeat or anything like that, but I think this team can have a good showing, especially since we lost no coach, and Eli is comfortable with Palmer and Gilbride, and no more Lewis and Hufangel anymore.

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 06:55 PM
I'd say Eli is fairly famous.

yes but I think he meant along the lines of viewed as one of the best at a guys position. If you look at the Giants, we don't have many guys who are top 5 at their position with only Osi, Feagles, IMO Snee and perhaps Pierce.

don't mean to put words in you're mouth shocking/banning(lolz), if I interpreted your words wrong, feel free to correct me.

and to the Cowboys fan who brought up their rankings on Scouts Inc: espn sucks, nobody cares about their rankings. Brett Favre was ranked #1 in every catagory anyways

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 07:32 PM
banning(lolz)

See, I'd think you'd go Moss there, not Banning. Then again, I guess last season Manning+Boss>Moss. :D

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:36 PM
See, I'd think you'd go Moss there, not Banning. Then again, I guess last season Manning+Boss>Moss. :D

haha oh yes. freaking Sinorice Moss. oh how I wish he wouldn't fail so epicly...

You could have alot of fun with "Manning" haha so many posibilitis...kinda like Campbell's tomato soup....

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 07:50 PM
haha oh yes. freaking Sinorice Moss. oh how I wish he wouldn't fail so epicly...

I was referring to a different Moss there, and a certain victory over a certain "perfect" team full of arrogant asses.

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:57 PM
I was referring to a different Moss there, and a certain victory over a certain "perfect" team full of arrogant asses.

haha VERY well played, kudos and touche!

Jughead10
08-10-2008, 11:16 PM
I think in the future when listing top 5 elite teams, we require that the teams win a playoff game within the last decade.

awfullyquiet
08-11-2008, 12:45 AM
I just dont know how u can call a team elite when they havnt made the playoffs , and just because u add some new players in the offseason that may look good on paper they havnt proved to be an elite team. So calling a team an elite team without seeing them play at the elite level is dumb.

you lack coherence :):):):):)

here's a story. the browns have done what the cards haven't been able to. turn themselves right. the browns have progressively gotten better... and yes, they have played against elite competition, the regular season isn't filled with creampuff games like you SEC (big 12, big 10, notre dame) like to schedule. and it's not like the AFC north is filled with big pansies too. I wouldn't call the bengals the easiest team to beat, and definitely not pgh. they've kept themselves in a lot of games, and are getting there... they're not there yet though.

bantx
08-11-2008, 12:47 AM
you lack coherence :):):):):)

here's a story. the browns have done what the cards haven't been able to. turn themselves right. the browns have progressively gotten better... and yes, they have played against elite competition, the regular season isn't filled with creampuff games like you SEC (big 12, big 10, notre dame) like to schedule. and it's not like the AFC north is filled with big pansies too. I wouldn't call the bengals the easiest team to beat, and definitely not pgh. they've kept themselves in a lot of games, and are getting there... they're not there yet though.

what was the point of this u just said what i said, theyre not an elite team

Dam8610
08-11-2008, 01:31 AM
Are you questioning my credibility because I'm a 'Boys fan? If so, it would be nice to hear a rebuttal that includes actual evidence as to why what I'm saying is FOS.

Also, if you knew a damn thing about me, you would realize that I am the last one in the world to over-estimate my team. This team has had to show me a lot before I was willing to buy into them as a legit contender. Before last season I was questioning whether or not we would make the playoffs, and predicted, iirc, a 10-6 record for the season. I don't hype just to hype.

All I'm saying in this thread is that the Cowboys are as loaded with talent for this season as any team I have ever seen since I've been watching the NFL. Of course its a little suspect coming from a 'Boys fan, but if you took a close look, you would realize that its true. There's a reason that we ranked among the best at every position in the positional rankings that Scouts Inc put out last month. 6th QB, 5th RB, 8th WR, 2nd TE, 2nd OL, 6th DL, 1st LB and 1st DBs. Just as a quick reference, here are the other 3 elite teams and their rankings:

Team.....QB...RB...WR...TE...OL...DL...LB....DB
DAL........6.....5.....8.....2.....2.....6....1... ...1
SD.........14....1.....9.....1.....6.....8....2... ...4
NE.........1.....19....1.....15....4....3.....3... ..19
Ind.........2.....8.....5.....6.....5....14...14.. ...5


As you can see, Dallas fares extremely well in every phase of the game. There's no weakness, although I do think we ranked a little high on the DL--no way we should be above SD, who I think has arguably the best group in the league--and a little too low in WR--its laughable to see us at 8 and SD, who has no go-to threat, at #9--and possibly QB.

But even if one questions the credibility of these rankings, which is certainly valid considering some of the poor content ESPN puts out these days, this still illuminates an undeniable point. SD and Dallas are the two best teams in the league because they lack any real point of weakness. The thing that puts Dallas above SD in my mind is QB play, where Romo is clearly better than Rivers, and the fact that TO presents a much more formidable #1 passing option than SD can boast, Gates' amazing ability not withstanding.

Indy and NE are both dealing with serious holes in their defenses. The Colts always lack heft on the DL, but recently Freeney hasn't been his old self, and now their LB corps has failed to produce young playmakers like they have in the past. The Pats got an extremely favorable grade for their secondary, given the fact that they lost their only above average player (unless you still think Harrison qualifies, which is a good laugh in itself) and are dealing with a bunch of no-talent-having vets, has beens, and unproven young players. They are probably in the 25-30 range in reality. Their TEs and RB, likewise, are less than impressive.

My point overall, though, is that these teams are the cream of the crop, and Dallas is (though by a very thin margin) at the head of that crop simply due to the quality of their players. People are sucked into their own teams' training camps right now, and thus are less aware of what other teams are doing, and that's fine. That is what pre season and TC are all about.

Unfortunately, though, the sun always rises, and then you are forced to look at the quality of your players by the harsh light of day. When that happens, people will be talking about the special team that Dallas has assembled for this year. Just last night Jamie Dukes was raving about it on the NFLN. Scouts Inc and PFW have also noticed. This is not the typical fanboy raving about FA or late round picks that are tearing up training camp. This is a team that is so loaded that I feel compelled to get on the record right now, just so that when the storm breaks everyone here can't say "wow, nobody saw this coming".

I encourage everyone who is a fan of great football to really take a hard look at the Cowboys' roster and then argue with me.

If you think that they will have trouble with leadership and poise during the playoffs...ok, there's no way to argue that but saying "wait and see". But if you don't think they are the most talented team in the league, you're just plain wrong.

If the Cowboys are still starting Roy Williams, they have a hole as big as any the Pats or Colts have. Their WR corps is not deep, they're one deep at TE (which is why I don't get how SD is 1 and Dallas is 2 in the TE ranking). For all the raving you did about the Cowboys' defense, they still allowed 20.3 points per game, good for 13th in the NFL last season, and the main additions to that defense this offseason were at CB. As for the holes on the Pats and Colts, how many times have the Colts had issues at DT and the Pats had issues at DB? Didn't the Pats win the Super Bowl with Troy Brown at nickelback? Didn't the Colts win the Super Bowl with the worst run defense in NFL history? Obviously these two teams know how to deal with the "issues" they have, and while they may not be the most talented "on paper", they both seem to win at least 12 games and get close to a championship every year. One good year in Dallas in which far too many of their players got voted into the Pro Bowl does not make them a better team.

PoopSandwich
08-11-2008, 01:09 PM
I think in the future when listing top 5 elite teams, we require that the teams win a playoff game within the last decade.

Maybe if that mattered for the upcoming season I would agree.

Sniper
08-11-2008, 01:15 PM
How did the Cowboys get named the best DB group in the NFL, when they don't have the best DBs in their own division?

Gay Ork Wang
08-11-2008, 01:24 PM
Since when do the Boys have the best LB Corps? Id take Seattle and Bears LBs over Boys LBs

Hines
08-11-2008, 01:25 PM
How did the Cowboys get named the best DB group in the NFL, when they don't have the best DBs in their own division?

Thats what happens when you are "Americas team."

Sniper
08-11-2008, 01:40 PM
Thats what happens when you are "Americas team."

Maybe so, but I'll take Asante Samuel/Lito Sheppard/Sheldon Brown/ a healthy Brian Dawkins/Quintin Mikell over Terrence Newman/Adam Jones/Mike Jenkins/Ken Hamlin/Burnt Toast. Just me though.

Hines
08-11-2008, 01:42 PM
Maybe so, but I'll take Asante Samuel/Lito Sheppard/Sheldon Brown/ a healthy Brian Dawkins/Quintin Mikell over Terrence Newman/Adam Jones/Mike Jenkins/Ken Hamlin/Burnt Toast. Just me though.

I second that good sir. But any word on Quinten Demps? I really loved how he played last Friday. Good player, real good player.

Im_a_Romosexual
08-11-2008, 01:44 PM
Maybe so, but I'll take Asante Samuel/Lito Sheppard/Sheldon Brown/ a healthy Brian Dawkins/Quintin Mikell over Terrence Newman/Adam Jones/Mike Jenkins/Ken Hamlin/Burnt Toast. Just me though.

Don't forget about Anthony Henry.

Sniper
08-11-2008, 01:47 PM
Don't forget about Anthony Henry.

Henry/Jenkins. Whoever your nickel will be isn't good enough to make up for Roy.

Sniper
08-11-2008, 01:48 PM
I second that good sir. But any word on Quinten Demps? I really loved how he played last Friday. Good player, real good player.

Apparently he's been the star of TC and I agree he played well vs. the Steelers. I like the fact that he's a ballhawk, and I definitely think he's our FS of the future. Mikell is a above adequate strong safety and Demps wouldn't really fit at SS. I expect him to get some PT this year for sure though.

Im_a_Romosexual
08-11-2008, 01:51 PM
Henry/Jenkins. Whoever your nickel will be isn't good enough to make up for Roy.

Just stating that they could have ranked the Cowboys ahead of the Eagles based on depth. The Eagles are definately more top heavy, but the Cowboys probably have better depth.

Hines
08-11-2008, 01:53 PM
Apparently he's been the star of TC and I agree he played well vs. the Steelers. I like the fact that he's a ballhawk, and I definitely think he's our FS of the future. Mikell is a above adequate strong safety and Demps wouldn't really fit at SS. I expect him to get some PT this year for sure though.

How is Mikell feeling about taking that shot from Mendenhall? ;)

Sniper
08-11-2008, 02:02 PM
Just stating that they could have ranked the Cowboys ahead of the Eagles based on depth. The Eagles are definately more top heavy, but the Cowboys probably have better depth.

How often are you going to use your dime packages?

Newman>Samuel
Jones<Sheppard (Jones gets most of his rep as a return man)
Henry<Brown
Jenkins>Hanson
Hamlin<Dawkins
Williams<Mikell

Sniper
08-11-2008, 02:02 PM
How is Mendenhall feeling about taking that shot from Mikell? ;)

Fixed that for you.

Im_a_Romosexual
08-11-2008, 02:07 PM
How often are you going to use your dime packages?

Newman>Samuel
Jones<Sheppard (Jones gets most of his rep as a return man)
Henry<Brown
Jenkins>Hanson
Hamlin<Dawkins
Williams<Mikell

Just was stating a case for Scouts Inc., personally I would rank the Eagles higher.

Burns336
08-11-2008, 02:12 PM
How often are you going to use your dime packages?

Newman>Samuel
Jones<Sheppard (Jones gets most of his rep as a return man)
Henry<Brown
Jenkins>Hanson
Hamlin<Dawkins
Williams<Mikell

Disagree with Jones getting most of his rep as a return man, as do the metrics (not sure if you use them as part of your analysis or not?) He was a damn good corner the last year he played. Lito Sheppard on the other hand is coming off of one of the worst seasons of any starting corner last year.

and we will use the dime package a lot. In fact, we use it instead of the nickel to get more cover guys on the field. It's basically set up like the nickel formation except Anthony Henry lines up in a LB position to cover the TE. Also, Roy Williams is taken out of this formation.

Sniper
08-11-2008, 02:32 PM
Just was stating a case for Scouts Inc., personally I would rank the Eagles higher.

I know what you meant. Just tossing out my two cents.

Sniper
08-11-2008, 02:33 PM
Disagree with Jones getting most of his rep as a return man, as do the metrics (not sure if you use them as part of your analysis or not?) He was a damn good corner the last year he played. Lito Sheppard on the other hand is coming off of one of the worst seasons of any starting corner last year.

and we will use the dime package a lot. In fact, we use it instead of the nickel to get more cover guys on the field. It's basically set up like the nickel formation except Anthony Henry lines up in a LB position to cover the TE. Also, Roy Williams is taken out of this formation.

Lito Sheppard had a terrible year, yes. But it's pretty hard to be an elite CB, or any position, when you have nagging injuries all year and an inconsistent pass rush besides Trent Cole.

MetSox17
08-11-2008, 02:37 PM
Lito Sheppard had a terrible year, yes. But it's pretty hard to be an elite CB, or any position, when you have nagging injuries all year and an inconsistent pass rush besides Trent Cole.

Well if that's the case, Anthony Henry should be in the discussion, cause if it weren't for injuries, he'd be a Pro-Bowler every year. IF.

Gay Ork Wang
08-11-2008, 02:42 PM
Well if that's the case, Anthony Henry should be in the discussion, cause if it weren't for injuries, he'd be a Pro-Bowler every year. IF.
When did he make he the Pro Bowl the last time?

Sniper
08-11-2008, 02:49 PM
Well if that's the case, Anthony Henry should be in the discussion, cause if it weren't for injuries, he'd be a Pro-Bowler every year. IF.

Except Lito is a 2x Pro Bowler. Henry?

MetSox17
08-11-2008, 03:06 PM
When did he make he the Pro Bowl the last time?

My post was not to insinuate that Anthony Henry had made Pro-Bowls, but that he would, should he stay healthy a full year and play to his potential. I'm simply pointing out that injuries can't be used as an excuse if you don't want it used against you as well.

Except Lito is a 2x Pro Bowler. Henry?

Henry got snubbed his rookie year. Not many people can rack up 10 ints in a season.

Sniper
08-11-2008, 03:30 PM
My post was not to insinuate that Anthony Henry had made Pro-Bowls, but that he would, should he stay healthy a full year and play to his potential. I'm simply pointing out that injuries can't be used as an excuse if you don't want it used against you as well.



Henry got snubbed his rookie year. Not many people can rack up 10 ints in a season.

Lito deals with actual Pro Bowls, not shoulda coulda wouldas. And Lito kills the Cowboys! :)

MetSox17
08-11-2008, 04:10 PM
Lito deals with actual Pro Bowls, not shoulda coulda wouldas. And Lito kills the Cowboys! :)

So because he played at a Pro-Bowl level before, he's automatically better RIGHT NOW than a lot of guys, even though he had a putrid year?

DMWSackMachine
08-12-2008, 01:23 AM
Well, not to sound too snobbish, but I actually think that the Cowboys' DBs are significantly better than the Eagles. To the point where its not even a real discussion.

Lito was terrible last year, and hasn't been that good his whole career, imo. He gambles far too much and WRs make him pay for it. When you have members of upper management (was it your owner or your GM?) calling you out for your YPA....I'm pretty sure you>nobody, but that's just me.

As for Adam Jones being "overrated"....maybe you should talk to some Titans fans. Unless they are out to pick a bone, they will tell you that he was not just good, but pretty close to dominant in the last season he played for Tennessee. His metrics showed it. He was beginning to get recognition as one of the best in the league, and he made big time plays (the INT against the Giants, anyone?) that changed games.

As for Henry, he isn't the best in coverage, and is particularly vulnerable to the deep out, but he is very solid and makes enough plays both in coverage and against the run to make his a real asset. Not a pure cover guy, but a very good player.

Throw in Mike Jenkins, who would be starting if the season began today, and who has shown the ability to play right away at a fairly high level, and you have the deepest and most top-heavy unit of CBs in the league.

If you want to quibble by bringing safeties into the argument, all I can say is that Dawkins hasn't been the same player for the past 2 years. If you are counting on him "being healthy" for the first time in years at his age, that's your business. Doesn't seem smart to me, but whatever.


Which is all not to say that the Eagles aren't looking good at DB, as they are. But they aren't close to being where the 'Boys are at.

DMWSackMachine
08-12-2008, 01:44 AM
If the Cowboys are still starting Roy Williams, they have a hole as big as any the Pats or Colts have. Their WR corps is not deep, they're one deep at TE (which is why I don't get how SD is 1 and Dallas is 2 in the TE ranking). For all the raving you did about the Cowboys' defense, they still allowed 20.3 points per game, good for 13th in the NFL last season, and the main additions to that defense this offseason were at CB. As for the holes on the Pats and Colts, how many times have the Colts had issues at DT and the Pats had issues at DB? Didn't the Pats win the Super Bowl with Troy Brown at nickelback? Didn't the Colts win the Super Bowl with the worst run defense in NFL history? Obviously these two teams know how to deal with the "issues" they have, and while they may not be the most talented "on paper", they both seem to win at least 12 games and get close to a championship every year. One good year in Dallas in which far too many of their players got voted into the Pro Bowl does not make them a better team.


This is just another example of how once an idea starts to gain steam, it gets totally and utterly out of control and takes on a life of its own. FWIW, there wasn't a single deep pass play completed by the opposition last year with Roy even in the picture. Not one. He got beat some over the middle (particularly against Shockey, who seemed to really have his number), but name me a safety in the league who doesn't get beat some.

As for us allowing 20.3 ppg last year, that would be exactly right. We were middle of the pack after allowing an exorbitant amount of points on return TDs (Int, punt, KO), and we were upper 1/3 in yards allowed. But in no way were we an elite defense. Never said we were. But that was with JACQUES EFFING REEVES starting 13 games due to injuries first to Newman and then to Henry. Reeves may have been the worst CB to start a game last year--he was the 2nd (iirc) most targeted CB in the league and was bottom 5 in total allowed yardage--and was replacing, at times, maybe the best cover corner in the league. Slippage, anyone? And Newman didn't really get all the way back until the final 6 weeks or so.

The other soft spots were at WILB and NT, where we had Akin Ayodele (who was basically JAG and never made any plays or did anything worth noticing, but wasn't a liability, either) and Jay Ratliff (who was surprisingly terrific, but who was undersized and wore down some as the year went on). Our backup NT is where we were hurting. After bringing in Tank Johnson, it was supposed to be shored up, but Tank had a hard time getting into a groove and didn't make much of an impact.

This season, those spots are being manned by Zach Thomas, who has actually been Zach Thomas in training camp and preseason, not some shadow of the player of old, and a new, improved, and incredibly hard to stop Tank Johnson with a full off season under his belt. Tank has been so good in camp (and in the first preseason game, where he got a sack on the first series against a very good SD OLine) that we have been shuffling our DL rotation to get him more playing time.


This defense was pretty good last year. Will all these changes make them dominant? Not necessarily, but possibly. I would count on them being a top 10 defense for certain, barring any serious injuries. But the pieces are there for a dominant defense to emerge, certainly. Given that their offense was one of the better offenses in NFL history last year, I'd say its looking pretty good.


As for the Pats and Colts....don't think I'm disrespecting them any. They have earned the benefit of the doubt with what they've done, and I'll give them that. NFL seasons are not played out on paper, either, and I also recognize that fact. But a big part of the evaluation process is looking at where a team was last year, and then factoring in the changes/improvements/defections that they went through during the off season. Given that the Cowboys were 13-3 and most of the key players on the team are young and improving (as opposed to the Colts and Pats), and then factoring in the upgrades they've recieved that those two teams haven't, its not a stretch to say that the Cowboys are a better team personnel wise. Which is all I'm saying. You'll notice that I'm not guaranteeing a Super Bowl victory or anything. I know that **** happens. But this team has enough talent to become one for the ages.

Bigburt63
08-12-2008, 08:34 AM
This season, those spots are being manned by Zach Thomas, who has actually been Zach Thomas in training camp and preseason, not some shadow of the player of old, and a new, improved, and incredibly hard to stop Tank Johnson with a full off season under his belt. Tank has been so good in camp (and in the first preseason game, where he got a sack on the first series against a very good SD OLine) that we have been shuffling our DL rotation to get him more playing time.



the same logic that u used for dawkins could be used for thomas. How much of zach thomas (the great to elite zach thomas) are you going to get? he hasnt been healthy for a couple years now, and his play has already begun to fall off.

thule
08-12-2008, 08:50 AM
the same logic that u used for dawkins could be used for thomas. How much of zach thomas (the great to elite zach thomas) are you going to get? he hasnt been healthy for a couple years now, and his play has already begun to fall off.

Last couple of years? Check your facts...in 2006 he started 16 games and was a 1st team all-pro as well as a pro-bowler.

Play has begun to fall off? You realize he was on pace for a career high in tackles last year before he got in a CAR ACCIDENT. We aren't talking about Troy Aikman getting beat up on the field...we are talking about a guy who was in a car accident...

Put this together with the fact that good reports are coming from training camp...Brain Stewart is raving...he showed on the football field in the first preseason game the same things he's been showing us for over 10 years now.

Try backing up your statements with facts...not fake thoughts.

Sniper
08-12-2008, 09:12 AM
Lito was terrible last year, and hasn't been that good his whole career, imo. He gambles far too much and WRs make him pay for it. When you have members of upper management (was it your owner or your GM?) calling you out for your YPA....I'm pretty sure you>nobody, but that's just me.

So because he had one bad year filled with nagging injuries, you suck? Um, okay. Check out his other years. Lurie called him out for his YPA last year, when he was terrible (with nagging injuries). Lito was never healthy last year.

As for Adam Jones being "overrated"....maybe you should talk to some Titans fans. Unless they are out to pick a bone, they will tell you that he was not just good, but pretty close to dominant in the last season he played for Tennessee. His metrics showed it. He was beginning to get recognition as one of the best in the league, and he made big time plays (the INT against the Giants, anyone?) that changed games.

When was the last time Adam Jones played a significant game? Ah, okay.

As for Henry, he isn't the best in coverage, and is particularly vulnerable to the deep out, but he is very solid and makes enough plays both in coverage and against the run to make his a real asset. Not a pure cover guy, but a very good player.

Throw in Mike Jenkins, who would be starting if the season began today, and who has shown the ability to play right away at a fairly high level, and you have the deepest and most top-heavy unit of CBs in the league.
I'm gonna go ahead and wait until he plays a down of regulart season football to see how good he is. Crazy, I know.

If you want to quibble by bringing safeties into the argument, all I can say is that Dawkins hasn't been the same player for the past 2 years. If you are counting on him "being healthy" for the first time in years at his age, that's your business. Doesn't seem smart to me, but whatever.

It's not quibbling if we're talking about DBs. Last I checked, safeties are DBs too. And 70% of Brian Dawkins>100% of Roy Williams.


Which is all not to say that the Eagles aren't looking good at DB, as they are. But they aren't close to being where the 'Boys are at.

I'm sorry, I forgot the Cowboys are the best at every position. Especially SS, DE, NT, WR2 etc...



Left some comments

Bigburt63
08-12-2008, 09:40 AM
Last couple of years? Check your facts...in 2006 he started 16 games and was a 1st team all-pro as well as a pro-bowler.

Play has begun to fall off? You realize he was on pace for a career high in tackles last year before he got in a CAR ACCIDENT. We aren't talking about Troy Aikman getting beat up on the field...we are talking about a guy who was in a car accident...

Put this together with the fact that good reports are coming from training camp...Brain Stewart is raving...he showed on the football field in the first preseason game the same things he's been showing us for over 10 years now.

Try backing up your statements with facts...not fake thoughts.

First off, im not trashing on Thomas, i actually wanted the pats to get him.
I think stats for defense can be overrated and inflated in some aspects, particularly tackles. The same goes for pro-bowl selection. He's a 35 (on opening weekend) year old linebacker, who was hurt last year, and like most has been hurt in his career. He hasnt missed alot of time, but he hasnt been imperviosu to injuries. I didn't say he got hurt on the field, because it really doesnt matter how he got hurt. I don't put much stock into training camp reports as its camp practices, not game situations, alot of players perform much better in games than they do in practices.

Dam8610
08-12-2008, 10:58 AM
This is just another example of how once an idea starts to gain steam, it gets totally and utterly out of control and takes on a life of its own. FWIW, there wasn't a single deep pass play completed by the opposition last year with Roy even in the picture. Not one. He got beat some over the middle (particularly against Shockey, who seemed to really have his number), but name me a safety in the league who doesn't get beat some.

One play? Did you watch the thrashing the Pats put on your team last year? Name one of those long passes where Roy Williams WASN'T Tom Brady's victim of choice. He got TORCHED in that game. I'm not saying he's horrible in coverage because someone else said it, I'm saying it because every time I've watched him, he seems to get beat in coverage.

As for us allowing 20.3 ppg last year, that would be exactly right. We were middle of the pack after allowing an exorbitant amount of points on return TDs (Int, punt, KO), and we were upper 1/3 in yards allowed. But in no way were we an elite defense. Never said we were. But that was with JACQUES EFFING REEVES starting 13 games due to injuries first to Newman and then to Henry. Reeves may have been the worst CB to start a game last year--he was the 2nd (iirc) most targeted CB in the league and was bottom 5 in total allowed yardage--and was replacing, at times, maybe the best cover corner in the league. Slippage, anyone? And Newman didn't really get all the way back until the final 6 weeks or so.

You're trying to tell a Colts fan about allowing an "exorbitant" amount of points on STs? The Colts allowed the most return TDs last year, and the special teams were so horrid against San Diego that they lost the game for the Colts (say what you will about Manning's 6 INTs, the Chargers only got 9 points from them, and the Colts were STILL a chip shot FG away from winning at the end). The Colts still allowed the fewest points in the NFL without Dwight Freeney for half of the season. What's my point? If your defense was truly as good as you talk it up to be, it would still have been among the league's elite units despite allowing a bunch of ST points, and one or two injuries to average-good (not elite former runner-ups for DPOY) starters don't explain it away.

The other soft spots were at WILB and NT, where we had Akin Ayodele (who was basically JAG and never made any plays or did anything worth noticing, but wasn't a liability, either) and Jay Ratliff (who was surprisingly terrific, but who was undersized and wore down some as the year went on). Our backup NT is where we were hurting. After bringing in Tank Johnson, it was supposed to be shored up, but Tank had a hard time getting into a groove and didn't make much of an impact.

This season, those spots are being manned by Zach Thomas, who has actually been Zach Thomas in training camp and preseason, not some shadow of the player of old, and a new, improved, and incredibly hard to stop Tank Johnson with a full off season under his belt. Tank has been so good in camp (and in the first preseason game, where he got a sack on the first series against a very good SD OLine) that we have been shuffling our DL rotation to get him more playing time.

No offense, but the last I saw Zach Thomas, he was a shell of his former self, and Tank Johnson was an average starter with the Bears, so I wouldn't expect much more than that from him. Until I see different, there's no reason to believe it.

This defense was pretty good last year. Will all these changes make them dominant? Not necessarily, but possibly. I would count on them being a top 10 defense for certain, barring any serious injuries. But the pieces are there for a dominant defense to emerge, certainly. Given that their offense was one of the better offenses in NFL history last year, I'd say its looking pretty good.

The pieces are there for the Colts to put up 4 sacks a game and cause about 50 turnovers. I highly doubt it happens, but the pieces are there. As for the Cowboys' offense, the receiving corps is one injury away from average, and two injuries away from ugly (I'm counting TE as part of the receiving corps here), their running game is solid, but Romo needs Owens and Witten to be effective, and if he's not, even Marion Barber can't continually succeed against 8 man fronts.

As for the Pats and Colts....don't think I'm disrespecting them any. They have earned the benefit of the doubt with what they've done, and I'll give them that. NFL seasons are not played out on paper, either, and I also recognize that fact. But a big part of the evaluation process is looking at where a team was last year, and then factoring in the changes/improvements/defections that they went through during the off season. Given that the Cowboys were 13-3 and most of the key players on the team are young and improving (as opposed to the Colts and Pats), and then factoring in the upgrades they've recieved that those two teams haven't, its not a stretch to say that the Cowboys are a better team personnel wise. Which is all I'm saying. You'll notice that I'm not guaranteeing a Super Bowl victory or anything. I know that **** happens. But this team has enough talent to become one for the ages.

Okay, I can understand you saying the Pats are old at key positions, because they are (most of their LB corps and SS/"team leader" are well into their 30s, Moss is in his 30s, as are most of their RBs, two of their starting OLs, and Tom Brady), but where the hell are the Colts old? C? The Colts are one of the youngest teams in the NFL with (depending on who you have slated as starters) not one starter age 30+ on defense, including the 27 year old DPOY, and 3 starters age 30+ on offense, one of which (Manning) is a 2-time MVP and plays a position where the greatest of players (and not many would dispute that Peyton Manning is on his way to becoming one of the greatest QBs ever) usually play well into their 30s. I would be willing to bet for every "young and improving" starter you could name on the Cowboys, I could give you one on the Colts. So what are these "upgrades" the Cowboys have received that the Colts and Pats haven't? Other than an aging Zach Thomas and a guy who hasn't played an NFL down in two years, they just added rookies, not unlike the Pats or Colts, and I'm sure all three teams did their best to fill their voids. I understand excitement about the upcoming season (though personally I don't have much with Keyunta Dawson slated to start at UT, but that's for a whole different thread), but don't you think it's a tad overzealous to rate your team who did no better than the Pats and Colts last year and much worse in the 5 years prior, better than those two teams?

Jughead10
08-12-2008, 11:14 AM
The biggest weakness of the Cowboys is still the head coach. It seems he has allowed the cockiness of the fans actually spread to his players. The further they are removed from Parcells, the happier this Giants fan is.

NY+Giants=NYG
08-12-2008, 11:36 AM
The biggest weakness of the Cowboys is still the head coach. It seems he has allowed the cockiness of the fans actually spread to his players. The further they are removed from Parcells, the happier this Giants fan is.

I find that show on HBO, Hard Knocks, very interesting. I found it funny how they labeled it "camp cupcake." It's almost like when we had Fasshole as our coach, and we ran a very country club like atmosphere and camp. I, for one, prefer more of a strict, tough camp, after seeing Fasshole and Coughlin's two contrasting styles. I feel like we are working much harder in all phases then when we had Fassel as our coach.

DMWSackMachine
08-12-2008, 08:03 PM
One play? Did you watch the thrashing the Pats put on your team last year? Name one of those long passes where Roy Williams WASN'T Tom Brady's victim of choice. He got TORCHED in that game. I'm not saying he's horrible in coverage because someone else said it, I'm saying it because every time I've watched him, he seems to get beat in coverage.



Very quaint. The whole "I have seen it with my own eyes" thing. There's a problem, though, and it is that it has to actually be there in order for that tactic to work. Sorry.

Here is the truth. The Patriots completed exactly THREE passes of 20 or more yards in that entire game (consider for a second that Dallas averaged over 3 per game for the season).

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=271014006&period=0

Thanks to the magic of Tivo, here they are:


1) 2:14 1st qrt, Brady 35 yard pass to Welker deep middle. NE 14, DAL 0 On the play, Welker gets matched up man-on-man with Nate Jones (aka, the worst dime CB in the league last year....yah, one on one with Welker) as he is motioned into the slot. He runs a deep in pattern and gets wide open, Brady hits him after looking off the safety, Pat Watkins, who was responsible for holding the deep middle. Welker catches the ball on the 15 and has an easy run into the end zone.

Other Cowboys in the frame? None. Just Jones and Watkins--who was much too far out of position to make a play. Roy? In man coverage with Ben Watson going over the short middle of the field, roughly 3 yards from the LOS. Strike one.

2) 12:31 4th qrt, Brady 69 yard pass to Stallworth deep middle. NE 38 DAL 21. On the play Cowboys are in zero coverage with no safety help deep. Stallworth lines up in the slot to the right man-on-man with Jacques Reeves. He runs a post to the middle of the field and gets separation, Brady hits him in stride about 40 yards downfield. Reeves, already having given up the completion, now has a chance to tackle him and save the TD. Instead he is stiff armed to the ground by the, ahem, burly WR who then trotts in for the easy TD.

Other Cowboys in the frame? None at the time of the completion, though Newman speeds into sight at the end in a futile attempt to make the tackle. Roy? Definitely not involved in the play, and I couldn't locate him on the field. He was most likely not on it during the play. Strike two.

Those were the two big plays. The third barely qualifies, and yes, Roy was involved. Not so fast though.

3:39 1st qrt, Brady 28 yards down the middle to Ben Watson. Watson draws single coverage against RW and runs what looks to be a 9 route straight down the seam. With a FS over the top to help, and in what appeared to be text book coverage, Roy looks to have done his job. Unfortunately, Watkins is again looked off by Brady, and Tom hits Watson perfectly in stride, despite the fact that RW was running stride for stride with Watson down the field. Roy immediately brings him down.

As for the rest of the game, Brady sliced us apart with short throws. Welker spent the majority of the day locked up against Nathan Jones, and made us pay to the tune of 11 catches for 124 yards and 2 TDs. After checking the play by play and verifying it with the game film, I can only locate two completions which Roy was involved in the entire game. The one mentioned above, and 14 yard completion to Randy early in the 3rd quarter where he failed to get over and help Newman quickly enough.

Still want to talk? I would hope not. I recommend you know your stuff before making dramatic declarations.

DMWSackMachine
08-13-2008, 03:21 AM
You're trying to tell a Colts fan about allowing an "exorbitant" amount of points on STs? The Colts allowed the most return TDs last year, and the special teams were so horrid against San Diego that they lost the game for the Colts (say what you will about Manning's 6 INTs, the Chargers only got 9 points from them, and the Colts were STILL a chip shot FG away from winning at the end). The Colts still allowed the fewest points in the NFL without Dwight Freeney for half of the season. What's my point? If your defense was truly as good as you talk it up to be, it would still have been among the league's elite units despite allowing a bunch of ST points, and one or two injuries to average-good (not elite former runner-ups for DPOY) starters don't explain it away.



.....continued

More than STs returns, I was talking returns from TOs our offense committed as well. All told, we had 5 extra TDs put on us defensively and on STs. That is a difference of 30 points, or roughly 2 ppg. I would wager that most teams didn't even have 3. A small difference, but when we're talking about us being 13th in the league in ppg against, and all it would take is a little more than a 2 point improvement to move into the top 5 or 6, the small things count.

And don't try to paint me into a position where I'm criticizing the Colts. I love their team, and Peyton is one of my 3 favorite non-Cowboys in the league. But they have some serious issues heading into this year. Don't ask me how they masked their horrible interior personnel last year. I don't know. But those things only last for so long. Either one of those players will emerge as a top flight contributor, or the streak of success will end. Ugly, more than likely.

Finally, if you are refering to Terence Newman (who was the main injury problem we had last season) as average-good then you need your head examined. That's all.



No offense, but the last I saw Zach Thomas, he was a shell of his former self, and Tank Johnson was an average starter with the Bears, so I wouldn't expect much more than that from him. Until I see different, there's no reason to believe it.

The last you saw of Zach Thomas was with him walking aroung groggily due to a freakin' car crash. Before it happened, he was having his typical all-pro season. You never know how an injury like that will go, sure, so I won't get too bold here. But it looks very promising to this point, and that is coming from someone who was a huge skeptic when he signed, fwiw.

Tank, on the other hand, was not an average starter. He was the NT in the Tampa 2 scheme, and he was an improving young player. Was he Mean Joe Greene? 'Course not. But he wasn't chopped liver, either. Considering that all we have to have him for is to keep some of the load off of Ratliff (who was terrific, no matter how you color it) without getting blown off the ball, I think he'll be excellent for us. If he gives any more--which he appears ready to do, but whatever--then it will just be a bonus. But no sense talking to someone with their fingers in their ears.



The pieces are there for the Colts to put up 4 sacks a game and cause about 50 turnovers. I highly doubt it happens, but the pieces are there. As for the Cowboys' offense, the receiving corps is one injury away from average, and two injuries away from ugly (I'm counting TE as part of the receiving corps here), their running game is solid, but Romo needs Owens and Witten to be effective, and if he's not, even Marion Barber can't continually succeed against 8 man fronts.

Now we're going that route, huh? Considering that the Colts have never approached either figure, and that they can't reasonably expect any substantial improvement (with both Mathis and Freeney having reached the leveling off period of their careers, and not any real bell-cow prospects on the interior or backing them up....that I'm aware of, anyhow) from within, I would say, no. Dallas, on the other hand, has played like an elite defense for stretches at a time, and has struggled to maintay consistency. AKA, the trademark of a young developing unit. With a supreme talent like Ware--who looks like a young HOFer--leading the charge, and another elite talent/leader/cover man in the secondary to back him up, they have the upper end ability that usually allows for greatness, along with excellent players at literally every other position. Whether it comes together or not is up in the air. But on talent alone, from top to bottom, you can see raw material there in a way that bears remarking on.

As for the whole "one injury away" line.....rofl. We could play that game all day long. The Colts are one injury away from a Jim Sorgi fest and a top 3 pick. The Pats, too. Hell, the Giants are just 3 injuries away from having no quality pass rushers! Quick, see if Strahan will come back for 10 mil!!! What a joke.



Okay, I can understand you saying the Pats are old at key positions, because they are (most of their LB corps and SS/"team leader" are well into their 30s, Moss is in his 30s, as are most of their RBs, two of their starting OLs, and Tom Brady), but where the hell are the Colts old? C? The Colts are one of the youngest teams in the NFL with (depending on who you have slated as starters) not one starter age 30+ on defense, including the 27 year old DPOY, and 3 starters age 30+ on offense, one of which (Manning) is a 2-time MVP and plays a position where the greatest of players (and not many would dispute that Peyton Manning is on his way to becoming one of the greatest QBs ever) usually play well into their 30s. I would be willing to bet for every "young and improving" starter you could name on the Cowboys, I could give you one on the Colts. So what are these "upgrades" the Cowboys have received that the Colts and Pats haven't? Other than an aging Zach Thomas and a guy who hasn't played an NFL down in two years, they just added rookies, not unlike the Pats or Colts, and I'm sure all three teams did their best to fill their voids. I understand excitement about the upcoming season (though personally I don't have much with Keyunta Dawson slated to start at UT, but that's for a whole different thread), but don't you think it's a tad overzealous to rate your team who did no better than the Pats and Colts last year and much worse in the 5 years prior, better than those two teams?


First of all, do you realize that Wayne is going to be 30 this season? That is a little known fact that blew my mind. He, Peyton, and Marvin are all 30 or older, and Clark is 29. Throw in Saturday and you have a whole group of guys that are either at the tail end of or past their physical prime. Defensively, I guess Brock is the only significant player 30 and above, and he is barely 30. However, you must also remember that you are replacing some important vets this season, as you did last year. It looks promising thus far, but I want to see it continuing. I will grant you, though, that your FO has done a fantastic job of replacing their aging personnel. (On a side note, Marlin Jackson has a chance to be the pre-eminent Cover 2 CB in the league for the next decade; I think he has a strong chance to redefine the position)

However, all I said was that Dallas has more young and improving players in more key spots than Indy does. QB is the obvious here. While Romo is already 27, he has shown continual and steady improvement, and looks to be significantly better this year than last. Peyton, at the very most, can only hope to hold the bar. Not likely that he raises it any higher. Not that I want to get into a tit-for-tat (I just erased a laundry list of players I had compiled, realizing it would only provoke a similar reaction from you) on who-has-more-young-player-and-which-ones-are-better-nah-nah or anything, but I think its fairly evident that the Cowboys arrow is pointing up moreso than the Colts. If you disagree, I guess we'll just have to leave it there. But this seems obvious from where I'm standing.

Also, saying "they just added draft picks" is a convenient way to gloss over a fairly important point. The Colts have no 1st round pick this year (indeed, they got a big boost last season from it), while the Cowboys have not just one, but two. Both of which look ready to make a substantial impact this season, not to mention in the years to come. The Colts? Pollak hasn't been able to seize a starting spot even with Lilja on PUP and Charlie Johnson on the other side having been mediocre at best last season. Haven't heard one thing about Wheeler except that he is having knee surgery, that isn't a good sign. Tamme has had some good things said about him and it seems like he was the guy that caught those two TDs last week, wasn't he? But as a backup to Clark, and not being particularly talented physically you can only hope that he might develop down the road. Howard is really the only guy that I can tell might contribute at all for you this year from how it looks today. That is a far cry from what the Cowboys will be getting this year.

And finally, however you want to dismiss Adam Jones as being essentially worthless, the dude can flat play. He might be a worthless human being (not saying he is, but its not beyond the realm of possibility) but he is as talented as nearly any CB in the league, and he was playing at a Pro Bowl (if not All Pro) level the last year he played in Tennessee. If he doesn't get into troube off the field, there is no doubting that he will have a positive impact on it.




All told, I can see why people would take issue with me going out like this. More importantly, this is not my style. I don't usually stand on the hilltop and praise my team. My point here is that something is happening in Dallas this year, with the group of players that they have assembled, that has the potential to be historically significant. Who knows what happens when the season starts and the bullets start flying. But right now, in the month of August, with a blank sheet before us, it looks amazing. Every year, no matter how good your team is, you always have that one or two nagging spots that simply stick out at you. The Colts have DT and OG this year. The Pats have BOTH CBs and questions at LB and S. Last year, Dallas had a serious depth problem at NT, and were at a loss for what we would do if Terry Glen didn't play (which he didn't). As TC moved on, and our nickel CB Aaron Glenn, started showing signs of being washed up, quickly followed by a Terence Newman injury, CB moved to the forefront.

Every year, if its not one thing, its another. This year, with the Dallas Cowboys, there hasn't been.

And thats special.