PDA

View Full Version : 4th Annual NFLDC Preseason Rankings: #14


CJSchneider
08-10-2008, 02:15 PM
Tampa lost the last one by a 2 - 1 landslide. Here is the next vote.

32. Atlanta Falcons
31. Miami Dolphins
30. San Francisco 49ers
29. Kansas City Chiefs
28. Detroit Lions
27. Oakland Raiders
26. Denver Broncos
25. St. Louis Rams
24. Baltimore Ravens
23. New York Jets
22. Chicago Bears
21. Cincinnati Bengals
20. Carolina Panthers
19. Arizona Cardinals
18. Houston Texans
17. Buffalo Bills
16. Tennessee Titans
15. Tampa Bay Buccaneers

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 02:35 PM
The Redskins were CLEARLY in 2nd place in that last poll. How the hell do 2 AFC South teams come off the board before 1 NFC East team?

BeerBaron
08-10-2008, 03:10 PM
I'm still a little torn between the packers and skins but I think the skins get it just barely...also they were pretty firmly in 2nd place in the last one.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 03:13 PM
SEAHAWKS! FTL! They are soooo much worse than the Redskins and the Packers

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 03:17 PM
SEAHAWKS! FTL! They are soooo much worse than the Redskins and the Packers

The Redskins and Eagles are worse than the Titans and Texans, respectively, but who's still on the board?

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 03:22 PM
The Redskins and Eagles are worse than the Titans and Texans, respectively, but who's still on the board?

Redskins? Not Really. Eagles? NO WAY.

You're going to tell me that those 2 teams are better than a team with a top 3 defense and a top offense (Eagles have no problem moving the ball, just scoring it). The Eagles probably would have made the playoffs last year if they had a better special teams. This Year they add 3 young explosive players in DeSean Jackson, Lorenzo Booker, and Quintin Demps. And they improved ST coverage with players like LB Joe Mays and FB Luke Lawton.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 03:34 PM
Redskins? Not Really. Eagles? NO WAY.

You're going to tell me that those 2 teams are better than a team with a top 3 defense and a top offense (Eagles have no problem moving the ball, just scoring it). The Eagles probably would have made the playoffs last year if they had a better special teams. This Year they add 3 young explosive players in DeSean Jackson, Lorenzo Booker, and Quintin Demps. And they improved ST coverage with players like LB Joe Mays and FB Luke Lawton.

The Titans have probably the best running game in the NFL to go along with a great defense, and Houston is a young, up-and-coming team with a lot of pieces on both sides of the ball. Their DL is going to be scary this year. The Redskins, OTOH, squeaked into the playoffs in a weak NFC on the strength of playing for the memory of a great player they no longer have, and have changed coaches, and the Eagles will go as McNabb and Westbrook go. If they can keep those two healthy, they'll be a good team, if not, it's going to be as bad or worse than last year for them.

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 03:40 PM
Titans have the best running game in the NFL? Since when?

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 03:44 PM
Titans have the best running game in the NFL? Since when?

Since that's basically all their QB can do.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 03:44 PM
The Titans have probably the best running game in the NFL to go along with a great defense, and Houston is a young, up-and-coming team with a lot of pieces on both sides of the ball. Their DL is going to be scary this year. The Redskins, OTOH, squeaked into the playoffs in a weak NFC on the strength of playing for the memory of a great player they no longer have, and have changed coaches, and the Eagles will go as McNabb and Westbrook go. If they can keep those two healthy, they'll be a good team, if not, it's going to be as bad or worse than last year for them.

I can agree the Titans have the best running game, but they have no WRs to speak of, they're worse than the Eagles WRs. Defense isn't dominate they have no CBs worthy of mention. A team like the Colts or the Pats are going to throw all over them.

Houston is nice but they still don't really have a great o-line or a #2 WR. The RB situation isn't great. The Defensive backfield needs some help and they need a good LE opposite Mario Williams.

The Redskins have a young QB and some veteran WRs along with Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas. Clinton Portis is as good as ever. The o-line is really good but it remains to be seen if they can remain healthy. The defense is good with the blossoming star playing FS in Laron Landry. They aren't sqeaking in the playoffs, they're a pretty good team.

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 03:55 PM
Since that's basically all their QB can do.

For my money I will still take the Vikings run game with a better O-Line, the best 1-2 RB tandem in the game and another scrambling QB who goes by the name Tarvaris Jackson.

Eaglez.Fan
08-10-2008, 03:55 PM
The Redskins and Eagles are worse than the Titans and Texans, respectively, but who's still on the board?

Are you kidding me. It's not even close. C'mon. The Eagles and Redskins blow away the Texans and are both better than the Titans. And clearly nfldc agrees with me. (the vote)

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 03:58 PM
Are you kidding me. It's not even close. C'mon. The Eagles and Redskins blow away the Texans and are both better than the Titans. And clearly nfldc agrees with me. (the vote)

Let me tell you something EAGLEZZZZ FANZZZZ, NFLDC also voted that Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless mind is a better movie then The Godfather. Needless to say they are not always right.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:01 PM
I can agree the Titans have the best running game, but they have no WRs to speak of, they're worse than the Eagles WRs. Defense isn't dominate they have no CBs worthy of mention. A team like the Colts or the Pats are going to throw all over them.

Houston is nice but they still don't really have a great o-line or a #2 WR. The RB situation isn't great. The Defensive backfield needs some help and they need a good LE opposite Mario Williams.

The Redskins have a young QB and some veteran WRs along with Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas. Clinton Portis is as good as ever. The o-line is really good but it remains to be seen if they can remain healthy. The defense is good with the blossoming star playing FS in Laron Landry. They aren't sqeaking in the playoffs, they're a pretty good team.

Vince Young prefers throwing to his TEs anyway, and he has a pretty big name there (Crumpler), not to mention a pretty good young TE that was already there. Their OL is nasty, and their run game is great. The Titans have a solid front 7, which will make up for a weaker secondary more often than not.

As for the Texans, their offense still needs work, I agree, but their defense has a chance to be dominant with Amobi Okoye, Mario Williams, and DeMeco Ryans continuing to go in the right direction. Andre Johnson is a playmaker and can give that offense what they need to win a few games.

The Redskins are young on offense, and lack the passing game needed to take 8 out of the box for Portis, and their defense was solid last year...until they came up against a good QB.

Bottom line is, if the AFC South played the NFC East this year, I'd bet the AFC South would come away with more wins, which is why I don't understand how TWO AFC South teams came off the board before ONE NFC East team.

Gay Ork Wang
08-10-2008, 04:07 PM
Dont u forget Fred Bennett

BeerBaron
08-10-2008, 04:14 PM
Vince Young prefers throwing to his TEs anyway, and he has a pretty big name there (Crumpler), not to mention a pretty good young TE that was already there. Their OL is nasty, and their run game is great. The Titans have a solid front 7, which will make up for a weaker secondary more often than not.

such a big name that ATLANTA didn't want him......haha, sorry you made that one too easy....I'm not sure Crumpler has been good in a few years now.

Eaglez.Fan
08-10-2008, 04:18 PM
Their OL is nasty, and their run game is great.

What makes their run game so great. Their leading rusher averaged 3.7 a touch last year. Just because Norm Chow had no confidence in VY and ran a lot doesn't mean that running was effective.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:18 PM
Dont u forget Fred Bennett

Fred Bennett is one of the reasons I think the Texans' defense can be VERY good.

21ST
08-10-2008, 04:19 PM
Vince Young prefers throwing to his TEs anyway, and he has a pretty big name there (Crumpler), not to mention a pretty good young TE that was already there. Their OL is nasty, and their run game is great. The Titans have a solid front 7, which will make up for a weaker secondary more often than not.

As for the Texans, their offense still needs work, I agree, but their defense has a chance to be dominant with Amobi Okoye, Mario Williams, and DeMeco Ryans continuing to go in the right direction. Andre Johnson is a playmaker and can give that offense what they need to win a few games.

The Redskins are young on offense, and lack the passing game needed to take 8 out of the box for Portis, and their defense was solid last year...until they came up against a good QB.

Bottom line is, if the AFC South played the NFC East this year, I'd bet the AFC South would come away with more wins, which is why I don't understand how TWO AFC South teams came off the board before ONE NFC East team.


First of all i have no clue what makes you think or offense is young when im pretty sure we have one of the oldest offenses in the NFL. Second, you havent even seen how our passing game is going to be and you just assume its going to be lacking, yet you say the texans defense can be dominat??? Give me a break, and just for the record the Washington Redskins>Houston Texans and the Titans

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:19 PM
such a big name that ATLANTA didn't want him......haha, sorry you made that one too easy....I'm not sure Crumpler has been good in a few years now.

He was good under Vick, maybe he needs a mobile QB to be his most effective?

703SKINS202
08-10-2008, 04:20 PM
Let me tell you something EAGLEZZZZ FANZZZZ, NFLDC also voted that Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless mind is a better movie then The Godfather. Needless to say they are not always right.

LOL

So true, so so true...

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:20 PM
Now I get why there are no NFC East teams off the board and 2 AFC South teams off the board. Fanbases.

703SKINS202
08-10-2008, 04:21 PM
There really aren't that many eagles and skins fans on these boards.

Eaglez.Fan
08-10-2008, 04:24 PM
As for the Texans, their offense still needs work, I agree, but their defense has a chance to be dominant with Amobi Okoye, Mario Williams, and DeMeco Ryans continuing to go in the right direction.

How do the the Texans have a good defense? They were 23rd in the league last year in total defense. Yes Mario and Demeco will be very good but they were very good last year. Okoye won't make a big enough impact just yet to even get them close to a mid-range defense. There's no doubt that they'll be in the bottom half of the league again next year. And as you said the offense needs some work. So a below average defense + a bad offense = a good team according to you?

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:30 PM
There really aren't that many eagles and skins fans on these boards.

Was that a joke? There are WAY more Eagles OR Redskins fans here than there are Titans AND Texans fans here.

703SKINS202
08-10-2008, 04:33 PM
Well Texans are a new team and I don't know about the Titans but right now there are probably only 5 skins fans who consistently post.

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 04:36 PM
It's not like only Eagles and Redskins fans voted against the Titans so you can't say it is all fanbases.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:38 PM
How do the the Texans have a good defense? They were 23rd in the league last year in total defense. Yes Mario and Demeco will be very good but they were very good last year. Okoye won't make a big enough impact just yet to even get them close to a mid-range defense. There's no doubt that they'll be in the bottom half of the league again next year. And as you said the offense needs some work. So a below average defense + a bad offense = a good team according to you?

What part of "has a chance to be dominant" do you not understand? They've got excellent pieces with a year+ of experience in the system under their belts. If they gel right, they could be a very dangerous defense.

DLionALL
08-10-2008, 04:39 PM
Hell I voted for the Redskins but there is no way the Texans are better then the Eagles. Just no.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:42 PM
Hell I voted for the Redskins but there is no way the Texans are better then the Eagles. Just no.

If McNabb goes down AGAIN? You can't say that's unlikely.

703SKINS202
08-10-2008, 04:42 PM
I'm not real upset with the 14th ranking but I want to say a couple things about the skins.

Just because you got a new HC, doesn't mean you're going to automatically do worse or start over. The one thing Snyder was smart about was continuity with this team. We kept a lot of the same players and personnel on st/d. We have a new d coach but Blache knows the system Williams taught so we wont have a problem there. Also Zorn is keeping the running game similar to what Gibbs had in place. Another thing is this offense was more talented than Gibbs allowed it to be. His second tenure you could clearly tell the game was past him and our red zone offense was awful. He handicapped this team more than he helped it. So with Zorn coming in I wouldn't be surprised if we made a wild-card spot again. We just have to stay healthy and hope some games go our way.

Eaglez.Fan
08-10-2008, 04:43 PM
What part of "has a chance to be dominant" do you not understand? They've got excellent pieces with a year+ of experience in the system under their belts. If they gel right, they could be a very dangerous defense.

haha. I just told you why they can't dominate. Mario and Demeco are the ONLY two players that will have an impact next year (Okoye is still like 21) but the thing is they both played very well last year, perhaps dominant on occasion. But they STILL had the 23rd ranked defense. Even if both Demeco and Mario make the pro-bowl and play amazing the Texans still won't have a dominant defense. Two players doesn't make a defense. And no **** if any team gels right they could be very dangerous.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 04:43 PM
Vince Young prefers throwing to his TEs anyway, and he has a pretty big name there (Crumpler), not to mention a pretty good young TE that was already there. Their OL is nasty, and their run game is great. The Titans have a solid front 7, which will make up for a weaker secondary more often than not.

As for the Texans, their offense still needs work, I agree, but their defense has a chance to be dominant with Amobi Okoye, Mario Williams, and DeMeco Ryans continuing to go in the right direction. Andre Johnson is a playmaker and can give that offense what they need to win a few games.

The Redskins are young on offense, and lack the passing game needed to take 8 out of the box for Portis, and their defense was solid last year...until they came up against a good QB.

Bottom line is, if the AFC South played the NFC East this year, I'd bet the AFC South would come away with more wins, which is why I don't understand how TWO AFC South teams came off the board before ONE NFC East team.

I'm not so sure, the Eagles, Cowboys, Giants are all built to take down teams like the Colts. They all have good run defenses to stop teams like the Jaguars, Titans and Texans. The NFC East has pass weapons to obliterate the pass defenses of the Texans, and Titans. They have strong o-lines to withstand Mario Williams, Amobi Okoye, Dwight Freeney, Albert Haynesworth, John Henderson etc. etc. The NFC East has 4 playoff teams in the division. while the NFC south has 2-3.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 04:46 PM
If you switch the AFC South and NFC East, the AFC South would STILL put 3 teams in the playoffs, while the NFC East would struggle to put 2 teams in.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 04:48 PM
The NFC East is the SEC of the NFL, they beat each other up too much.

703SKINS202
08-10-2008, 04:50 PM
If you switch the AFC South and NFC East, the AFC South would STILL put 3 teams in the playoffs, while the NFC East would struggle to put 2 teams in.

You can't really say that this isn't the MLB. Teams play out of conference , yea the AFC is stronger but that doesn't mean NFC teams only beat up on NFC teams. It might be easier to make that last playoff spot but things can change. The NFC might be stronger this year you never know(although I doubt it).

BeerBaron
08-10-2008, 04:56 PM
I think something we all need to keep in mind with power rankings is that its about which team is the best team, and that doesn't necessarily reflect their final record or division status.

Would anyone argue that last season, the Jags and Titans (and obviously the Giants) were better teams than the Buccaneers? I would say they all were but who was the only one to get a home playoff game? Keep that kind of thing in mind.....

I honestly believe that if you stuck the Titans and Texans in the NFC East, they would still finish behind the Cowboys and Giants right around the same place as I think the Eagles and Redskins will finish. It's my estimation that the board is going with teams who have been traditionally stronger (skins and eagles) by giving them the benefit of the doubt and putting them ahead of younger, less proven teams in the Titans and Texans.

And if you AFC South supporters would just wait a few more selections, I think you'll see that the Colts and Jags still finish above most of the NFC East anyway.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 04:58 PM
Can we call this one? Redskins lose (or is it win?).

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 05:05 PM
You can't really say that this isn't the MLB. Teams play out of conference , yea the AFC is stronger but that doesn't mean NFC teams only beat up on NFC teams. It might be easier to make that last playoff spot but things can change. The NFC might be stronger this year you never know(although I doubt it).

Moving the NFC East to the AFC would take the only dominant team from the NFC last year out of the conference, and putting the AFC South in its place would replace it with a 13 win team, a 12 win team, and a 10 win team from the AFC. Do you really think any of those teams would miss the playoffs in that NFC? I, for one, have my doubts that 2 NFC East teams would make the playoffs in an AFC where they replace the AFC South.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 05:07 PM
And if you AFC South supporters would just wait a few more selections, I think you'll see that the Colts and Jags still finish above most of the NFC East anyway.

Did you mean supporter? I'm the only one arguing this here, and I think that's half the problem.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 05:11 PM
NFC East is better than the NFC South.

Cowboys = Colts
Giants < Jaguars
Eagles > Titans
Redskins > Texans

Honestly, the NFC East has 4/6 of the NFC's best teams. The only other teams that can stand up to NFC East teams are the Vikings and the Saints.

703SKINS202
08-10-2008, 05:12 PM
Who even cares the Skins lost I could make an argument that its a joke the Eagles have one vote and the skins have 18. The way the voting is going now the Eagles would be the #10 power ranking team which is funny to me. Everyone voted not just nfc east fans. I wouldn't vote for the giants or cowboys over the jags or colts just cause their in my division I hate those teams, I'm just going by who I think will come out on top.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 05:15 PM
Who even cares the Skins lost I could make an argument that its a joke the Eagles have one vote and the skins have 18. The way the voting is going now the Eagles would be the #10 power ranking team which is funny to me. Everyone voted not just nfc east fans. I wouldn't vote for the giants or cowboys over the jags or colts just cause their in my division I hate those teams, I'm just going by who I think will come out on top.

why is this funny?

703SKINS202
08-10-2008, 05:17 PM
why is this funny?

The difference between the Skins and Eagles is minimal at best and we were the ones who came out on top last year and made it to the playoffs so for there to be almost a 200% difference is just funny to me. I think the Eagles will be better but top 10 I'm not so sure about.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 05:22 PM
The difference between the Skins and Eagles is minimal at best and we were the ones who came out on top last year and made it to the playoffs so for there to be almost a 200% difference is just funny to me. I think the Eagles will be better but top 10 I'm not so sure about.

Why not top 10?

McNabb is looking like he back to his old self.
McNabb has never had a repitoure of weapons comprable to the ones he has now. The Eagles are 5-6 deep at WR. Kevin Curtis is coming off of a good season. Reggie Brown will hopefully improve. DeSean Jackson should add a deep threat to the offense. Jason Avant is a good route runner and is criminally under-used. Baskett has improved and will be a red-zone threat. The Fade route has been added to the playbook BTW.
McNabb when healthy never had a RB the stature of Brian Westbrook, he had the Staley who is good but pales in comparison to Westy. Booker will be lining up everywhere. LJ Smith is healthy and he will help the Red-zone offense. Brent Celek is the Best TE back-up the Eagles have has and Kris Wilson and Matt Schoebel are good #3 options.
The Defense is top notch, top 3 in the NFL.

BeerBaron
08-10-2008, 05:27 PM
Why not top 10?

McNabb is looking like he back to his old self.
McNabb has never had a repitoure of weapons comprable to the ones he has now. The Eagles are 5-6 deep at WR. Kevin Curtis is coming off of a good season. Reggie Brown will hopefully improve. DeSean Jackson should add a deep threat to the offense. Jason Avant is a good route runner and is criminally under-used. Baskett has improved and will be a red-zone threat. The Fade route has been added to the playbook BTW.
McNabb when healthy never had a RB the stature of Brian Westbrook, he had the Staley who is good but pales in comparison to Westy. Booker will be lining up everywhere. LJ Smith is healthy and he will help the Red-zone offense. Brent Celek is the Best TE back-up the Eagles have has and Kris Wilson and Matt Schoebel are good #3 options.
The Defense is top notch, top 3 in the NFL.

you forgot the: ....

Top 3 defense in the NFL...really?

....

keylime_5
08-10-2008, 05:52 PM
The difference between every team in the NFL, especially the middle ones like we're voting for here, is not great enough to say one is definitely better than the other. So we're really splitting hairs here, most of the middle of the pack teams in the NFL could just as easily win only 5 or 6 games as they can 10-13 games.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 05:56 PM
NFC East is better than the NFC South.

A true statement that has no relevance, bravo.

Cowboys = Colts

That could easily be argued, but I'll let it go.

Giants < Jaguars

True.

Eagles > Titans

IF McNabb is healthy all year MAYBE, but I'd take the Titans over them right now.

Redskins > Texans

I have a tough time buying that. If they had Sean Taylor, maybe, but playing for the memory of Taylor is the ONLY reason they finished last season above .500, they have a new coach which means a new system, which puts them at a disadvantage, and they were 9-7 in the NFC, which doesn't say much about them. The Texans were 8-8 in the AFC, are in their 3rd year under Gary Kubiak, have a better playmaker than anyone on the Redskins in Andre Johnson, they have young defensive studs that are only going to continue to improve, and they have the type of special teams that could win them a close game. If the Redsklins played the Texans 10 times, I think the Texans would win 6-7.

Honestly, the NFC East has 4/6 of the NFC's best teams.

I disagree, but even if you believe that, that's more of an indictment of the NFC than it is a statement of the quality of the NFC East.

The only other teams that can stand up to NFC East teams are the Vikings and the Saints.

Right, the Packers stand no chance just because they lost Favre and the Seahawks are no good. I may be defending my division, but at least I'm not extremely overexaggerating about it.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 05:58 PM
Umm.... The Seahawks are no good. 0 offensive weapons.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 06:05 PM
Umm.... The Seahawks are no good. 0 offensive weapons.

Well, I'm glad you agree with the rest of my post.

Eaglez.Fan
08-10-2008, 06:10 PM
This argument is going nowhere quickly however you completely contradicted yourself Dam8610. You said that the NFC East is better than the AFC South however, you agreed that the Jags>Giants, and you said that the texans>skins, titans>eagles and you agreed with colts=cowboys but said u could argue that the colts were better.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 06:12 PM
No, Eagles and Redskins are clearly better than the Titans and Texans. I did over-exaggerate a little but all the NFC East teams are in the top 7-8 Teams in the NFC.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 06:25 PM
This argument is going nowhere quickly however you completely contradicted yourself Dam8610. You said that the NFC East is better than the AFC South however, you agreed that the Jags>Giants, and you said that the texans>skins, titans>eagles and you agreed with colts=cowboys but said u could argue that the colts were better.

I said the AFC South is better, that's been my whole point the entire time. My argument makes more sense now, doesn't it? I said I could argue that the Colts are better than the Cowboys but I wouldn't because A) I didn't need to to make my point, and B) I don't want the 50 billion Cowboy fans on this site in this argument as well.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 06:31 PM
No, Eagles and Redskins are clearly better than the Titans and Texans. I did over-exaggerate a little but all the NFC East teams are in the top 7-8 Teams in the NFC.

How are the Redskins and Eagles "clearly" better than the Titans and Texans? Considering the Titans and Texans went 10-6 and 8-8 respectively in the AFC and the Redskins and Eagles went 9-7 and 8-8 respectively in the NFC, I don't see your point there at all. It's possible that the Eagles could be better than they were last year with a healthy McNabb, but at the same time, it's possible the Texans could be better this year with a healthy and developing Schaub. Even if the NFC East houses 4 of the top 8 teams in the NFC, that speaks VOLUMES more about the NFC than it does about the NFC East.

Oh, and to the person who said the NFC East is like the SEC because they beat up on each other, so does the AFC South, but then they have to face teams like the Patriots, Chargers, and Steelers outside their division.

etk
08-10-2008, 06:58 PM
Tampa worse than Minnesota and Washington?

Epic fail....

bearsfan_51
08-10-2008, 07:08 PM
Tampa worse than Minnesota and Washington?

Epic fail....

There really isn't much of a difference. All three are teams that are borderline playoff contendors that have been one and done the last few years. Of the three I think the Vikings clearly have the biggest upside. Washington and Tampa are practically the same team IMO.

BeerBaron
08-10-2008, 07:09 PM
Tampa worse than Minnesota and Washington?

Epic fail....

I outlined in the previous one why I thought Tampa should be behind Washington at least....and Minnesota is a very strong team imo with the exception of the QB spot.

Gay Ork Wang
08-10-2008, 07:10 PM
Tampa worse than the Eagles is an epic fail imo

etk
08-10-2008, 07:10 PM
There really isn't much of a difference. All three are teams that are borderline playoff contendors that have been one and done the last few years. Of the three I think the Vikings clearly have the biggest upside. Washington and Tampa are practically the same team IMO.

Yeah, you're right. They're close and there's not much of a difference, but if this poll was perfect we would be 13 not 15.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 07:13 PM
Tampa worse than the Eagles is an epic fail imo

your an epic fail IMO.

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:17 PM
what bugs me is that the iggles are in no way a top 13 team in the league. that's pretty ridiculous.

but then again, the Giants were like 25 in NFLDCpreseason rankings last year ;)

that's when Ricky Bobby went nuts, and would've made lots of people eat crow with his sig...

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 07:22 PM
Reading through alot of blogs, predictions etc. Etc, I realize that 99.9% of people don't think the Eagles are any good. I saw one where the Eagles lose their opener to RAMS yes, thats right folks the RAMS. The Eagles are the modern kings of the NFC, they're always in the playoff hunt the past 10 years, but I'll readily admit that we're probably not the best team in our division, but the Eagles are no joke, the Eagles aren't the pushover team that some make them out to be.

The only team that I think is better than the Eagles in the division are the Cowboys (as much as it pains me to say that). McNabb has looked good in TC so far and is developing chemistry with DeSean Jackson. For the 1st time in a long time the Eagles have a completely healthy McNabb in camp and when McNabb isn't injured, he can play with the best of 'em.

Westbrook is a Top talent in the NFL and he is an ideal fit for a WCO. People think that he is fragile and that when he goes down the Eagles are done for. Not True, Lorenzo Booker is Westbrook Jr. And Corell Buckhalter is more than servicable as a back-up.

People say, oh, do the Eagles even have any WR? Umm... Yes and while they aren't the greatest they are more than servicable. Kevin Curtis is a nice fit in a WCO and while Reggie Brown hasn't developed into that #1 WR that he was supposed to be he is still a solid #2. The Eagles criminally underuse Jason Avant. DeSean is the star of pre-vet. TC. So, yes the Eagles to have WRs.

LJ Smith is a one trick pony but he is a good one trick pony. He has only been a half-step behind Shockey statistically. There is also really good depth at TE in Celek, Kris Wilson and Matt Schoebel.

OTs are getting older but that doesn't mean they're getting worse. They are still very good players. The Eagles have one of the premier G in the NFL in Shawn Andrews. Todd Herramens and Jammaal Jackson are good starters. Depth is also very good with the exception of LT.


The DEs are arguably better than the Giants. The Eagles are set a DE and could go into the season carrying 6 on the roster. Trent Cole is a rising star and is already a pro-bowl player. Victor Abiamiri has alot of potential on the left side. Jaqua Thomas is a top-notch back-up, and Chris Clemons is an ideal situational pass rusher. Darren Howard can't be ruled out, he has re-invented himself this offseason. Oh, and lets not forget Eagles 3rd round choice Bryan Smith.

The Eagles are one of the best at DT in the NFL and the best part is that they are all young. Broderick Bunkley could develop into an all-pro player at RDT and Mike Patterson is a brick-wall at DT he racks up a bunch of tackles and is a future pro-bowler. Then you throw Trevor Laws in there, and the Eagles have one of the best DT rotations.

While largely unproven the LBers look promising. Stewart Bradley has all the makings of a pro-bowler. Omar Gaither is a playmaker at WLB. Chris Gocong has quitely developed in to a viable option at SLB. Depth is questionable to say the least. If everything goes right the Eagles could have the best front 7 in the NFL.

The Secondary is top-class with 4 star players in the backfield. Asante Samuel is a playmaker, Sheldon Brown is physical and Lito is shut down when healthy. Brian Dawkins may be getting older but he still plays with passion, heart and wreckless abandon. SS is questionable but everything can't be perfect can it? Sean Considine is a smart player who is good while on the field but he can't seem to stay on the field due to injury. Quintin Mikell is liability in Pass Coverage but is good against the run.

I'm done defending the Eagles because you are all convinced, but let me tell you, the Eagles will prove themsleves this season. Nothing I can say will convinve you all so I'll just wait and let the Eagles prove themselves. Don't sleep on the Eagles, they are a contender.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 07:28 PM
Reading through alot of blogs, predictions etc. Etc, I realize that 99.9% of people don't think the Eagles are any good. I saw one where the Eagles lose their opener to RAMS yes, thats right folks the RAMS. The Eagles are the modern kings of the NFC, they're always in the playoff hunt the past 10 years, but I'll readily admit that we're probably not the best team in our division, but the Eagles are no joke, the Eagles aren't the pushover team that some make them out to be.

The only team that I think is better than the Eagles in the division are the Cowboys (as much as it pains me to say that). McNabb has looked good in TC so far and is developing chemistry with DeSean Jackson. For the 1st time in a long time the Eagles have a completely healthy McNabb in camp and when McNabb isn't injured, he can play with the best of 'em.

Westbrook is a Top talent in the NFL and he is an ideal fit for a WCO. People think that he is fragile and that when he goes down the Eagles are done for. Not True, Lorenzo Booker is Westbrook Jr. And Corell Buckhalter is more than servicable as a back-up.

People say, oh, do the Eagles even have any WR? Umm... Yes and while they aren't the greatest they are more than servicable. Kevin Curtis is a nice fit in a WCO and while Reggie Brown hasn't developed into that #1 WR that he was supposed to be he is still a solid #2. The Eagles criminally underuse Jason Avant. DeSean is the star of pre-vet. TC. So, yes the Eagles to have WRs.

LJ Smith is a one trick pony but he is a good one trick pony. He has only been a half-step behind Shockey statistically. There is also really good depth at TE in Celek, Kris Wilson and Matt Schoebel.

OTs are getting older but that doesn't mean they're getting worse. They are still very good players. The Eagles have one of the premier G in the NFL in Shawn Andrews. Todd Herramens and Jammaal Jackson are good starters. Depth is also very good with the exception of LT.


The DEs are arguably better than the Giants. The Eagles are set a DE and could go into the season carrying 6 on the roster. Trent Cole is a rising star and is already a pro-bowl player. Victor Abiamiri has alot of potential on the left side. Jaqua Thomas is a top-notch back-up, and Chris Clemons is an ideal situational pass rusher. Darren Howard can't be ruled out, he has re-invented himself this offseason. Oh, and lets not forget Eagles 3rd round choice Bryan Smith.

The Eagles are one of the best at DT in the NFL and the best part is that they are all young. Broderick Bunkley could develop into an all-pro player at RDT and Mike Patterson is a brick-wall at DT he racks up a bunch of tackles and is a future pro-bowler. Then you throw Trevor Laws in there, and the Eagles have one of the best DT rotations.

While largely unproven the LBers look promising. Stewart Bradley has all the makings of a pro-bowler. Omar Gaither is a playmaker at WLB. Chris Gocong has quitely developed in to a viable option at SLB. Depth is questionable to say the least. If everything goes right the Eagles could have the best front 7 in the NFL.

The Secondary is top-class with 4 star players in the backfield. Asante Samuel is a playmaker, Sheldon Brown is physical and Lito is shut down when healthy. Brian Dawkins may be getting older but he still plays with passion, heart and wreckless abandon. SS is questionable but everything can't be perfect can it? Sean Considine is a smart player who is good while on the field but he can't seem to stay on the field due to injury. Quintin Mikell is liability in Pass Coverage but is good against the run.

I'm done defending the Eagles because you are all convinced, but let me tell you, the Eagles will prove themsleves this season. Nothing I can say will convinve you all so I'll just wait and let the Eagles prove themselves. Don't sleep on the Eagles, they are a contender.

I don't think you could've put the word "Eagles" in that post any more than you did, but even after typing all of that, you've failed to convince me that if McNabb goes down again, the Eagles will be able to beat a decent team. That is why I'm HIGHLY skeptical of them.

etk
08-10-2008, 07:32 PM
I outlined in the previous one why I thought Tampa should be behind Washington at least....and Minnesota is a very strong team imo with the exception of the QB spot.

Well sorry if I show up to the part a bit late, but I don't care to look up the post as I saw us play Washington last year and saw them play this week in the preseason. Simply put, their defense is average, and they have a million offensive weapons which I think is a disadvantage when Jim Zorn is running the offense. They're probably the worst team in the division, but I understand there is extreme NFC East bias on these boards so no one will vote for the Skins, Eagles or Giants. As a recap, we beat them last year, we beat them the time before that when we played in the regular season, and we lost a ridiculous one to them in the playoffs that same year (let's not go there). They haven't improved from last year I don't think, so I don't see where people get the idea that they're better than us when we beat them last year and we have improved.

Minnesota a strong team? I love their defensive line, and obviously they have a great ground game, but they still can't stop the pass and their QBs are worthless (this coming from a Jackson supporter). Add in the durability questions of Peterson, and you have a mediocre NFC team (like I said, just a small step below us).

So this is my last post on the matter because as bearsfan aptly pointed out, the spread between us and WASH/MINN is not worth arguing. I believe we are unquestionably better, but not by much. That doesn't really make sense, but it does, so enough of me confusing everyone including myself.

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:33 PM
The Eagles are NOTa contender. They'll be lucky to finish 3rd this year in the NFC East. AND is SJax's hold out lasts into the regular season, the Eagles WILL lose to the Rams. Book it.

and of course, the defending Super Bowl champs who's only key loss is Strahan, aren't better than the Eagles, who finsished 8-8, and last in the division...

and no, you're DE's AREN'T better than the Giants, that's' just silly.

Do you honestly believe everything you post? Like really? Are there also unicorns in your room as you post?

another thing: 12 teams make the playoffs, correct?(yes). if the Eagles are 13th, that means they'd be te best team not in the playoffs. And yes, i know the old: "don't focus on the past" will come up, but the upper teams haven't changed THAT much, and neither hae the eagles

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:34 PM
etk. NFC east bias? I'm more likely to vote for the iggles or skins because they're in the NFC East. And surely you can't think the Bucs are better than the Giants...

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 07:34 PM
The Eagles are NOTa contender. They'll be lucky to finish 3rd this year in the NFC East. AND is SJax's hold out lasts into the regular season, the Eagles WILL lose to the Rams. Book it.

and of course, the defending Super Bowl champs who's only key loss is Strahan, aren't better than the Eagles, who finsished 8-8, and last in the division...

and no, you're DE's AREN'T better than the Giants, that's' just silly.

Do you honestly believe everything you post? Like really? Are there also unicorns in your room as you post?

another thing: 12 teams make the playoffs, correct?(yes). if the Eagles are 13th, that means they'd be te best team not in the playoffs. And yes, i know the old: "don't focus on the past" will come up, but the upper teams haven't changed THAT much, and neither hae the eagles

i'd be willing to bet you anything that the Eagles go further than the Giants.

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:37 PM
i'd be willing to bet you anything that the Eagles go further than the Giants.

HAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA i'd bet my weiner and entire love on Rutgers on it. I'M THAT ******* SURE OF IT!

thanks for the laugh, i needed it

etk
08-10-2008, 07:38 PM
etk. NFC east bias? I'm more likely to vote for the iggles or skins because they're in the NFC East. And surely you can't think the Bucs are better than the Giants...

This forum is filled with NFC East fans, hence NFC East bias. If all the NFC East fans voted for other teams from the division, that would be the case, but I doubt that happens.

Bucs better than the Giants? No, but the Giants are overrated. It's hard to judge them because they're an awful team on paper but manage to win, especially on the road. It's hard to doubt them this year with Kenny Phillips taking Butler's place, though. Kenny is a beast and Butler sucks.

Gay Ork Wang
08-10-2008, 07:38 PM
please leave these boards if that happens

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 07:39 PM
HAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA i'd bet my weiner and entire love on Rutgers on it. I'M THAT ******* SURE OF IT!

thanks for the laugh, i needed it

I wasn't kidding, I doubt the Giants even make the playoffs.

Eaglez.Fan
08-10-2008, 07:45 PM
I'd probably bet on the Giants doing better than the eagles. And I'm happy with a top 13 placing in this pole. But some of you guys are vastly underrating the eagles. A torn ACl takes a year and a half to recover from, and since McNabb came back at week 14 the eagles were a very good team. Going 3-1. The only lose coming to the Giants, and during that amazing run from the giants (during that urn the giants were the best team in football). The eagles beat the Cowboys, Saints and Bills who are all respectable teams. And we also los to the Pats by 3 points with AJ Feeley at QB in week 12. If McNabb stays healthy the eagles are a top 10 team, if not we are a bottom 10 team. So anything in the middle is fine for a pre-season ranking.

edit- lmao and some fool neg reps me for saying the eagles are better then his texans. what a joke.

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:49 PM
I wasn't kidding, I doubt the Giants even make the playoffs.

that's the saddest part. tell you're unicorn and the tooth fairy I say hi.

"Kids, this brings me to my next lesson: don't smoke crack"

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 07:54 PM
Can we all just agree the Vikings are the best team in the NFL and move on?

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:55 PM
This forum is filled with NFC East fans, hence NFC East bias. If all the NFC East fans voted for other teams from the division, that would be the case, but I doubt that happens.

Bucs better than the Giants? No, but the Giants are overrated. It's hard to judge them because they're an awful team on paper but manage to win, especially on the road. It's hard to doubt them this year with Kenny Phillips taking Butler's place, though. Kenny is a beast and Butler sucks.

Awful on paper? come on now, this is just getting ridiculous.

Young QB who is lets say top 12 or so, easily top 15
-Tough RB trio
- good FB with sweet name
- Very solid WR corp with Plax being top 10(arguably)
- Good recieving, yet unproven TE. the biggest thing with him: he's huge and he's quiet. Nice plus there
- most under-rated OL in football. Tough, gritty, VERY united. Superb run blocking unit led by arguably top 10 RG in Snee
- Osi.
- Tuck's got loads of potential, and Tollefson ******* rules
- our DT's are average at best, but Freddy Robbins is pretty good actually. and funny when he runs
- top 10(perhaps 5) MLB in Pierce(who's lost his man handles!)
- below average OLB's, I'll give you that, but Kiwi will turn heads this year, just watch. Hungry groups competing for the other spot, with vet Clark in the lead. They'll stay hungry and hopefully play hard to keep the spot
- Aaron Ross leads a DEEP CB group with Madison being virtually another coach.
-Kenny Phillips
- Sammy Knight pushing James Butler
-Jeff Feagles
- Hixon, who's turning heads at camp.

are we stacked? not at all. but awful on paper? come on now...

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 07:56 PM
Can we all just agree the Vikings are the best team in the NFL and move on?

0 Rutgers players, overpaying Visthante Shiancoe AND T-Jack? ehhh

but for you Gonzo, top 5!

etk
08-10-2008, 07:58 PM
Awful's an over-exaggeration, but mediocre still holds true. I know you're a Giants fan so those names ring bells, but I'm not all that impressed. The words "above-average" and "pretty good" come up often when I look at that roster. It all clicks for the Giants, but as individuals those players aren't ones I covet all that much.

bearsfan_51
08-10-2008, 07:59 PM
Eli Manning had a good playoff series, but that doesn't hide the fact that he's been a very mediocre quarterback at best in his career.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 08:01 PM
Eli Manning had a good playoff series, but that doesn't hide the fact that he's been a very mediocre quarterback at best in his career.

EXACTLY! Eli is no where near the QB many make him out to be!

bearsfan_51
08-10-2008, 08:03 PM
Oh I'm not agreeing with you either, I think you're a huge homer. It's not 2004 anymore, the Eagles aren't even close to the class of the NFC.

etk
08-10-2008, 08:03 PM
EXACTLY! Eli is no where near the QB many make him out to be!

But everyone knows the Super Bowl defines your success as a quarterback, with the exception of Brett Favre. Trent Dilfer=god at one point too.

EDIT: is there anyone who doesn't think he's a huge homer? There's no need for that comment, it's to be assumed that you think he's a homer.

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 08:09 PM
0 Rutgers players, overpaying Visthante Shiancoe AND T-Jack? ehhh

but for you Gonzo, top 5!

If our first preseason game indication Shiancoe is ever worse then I thought he was and I think he is the worst starting TE in the NFL by a good bit. Holy hell is he a piece of ****.

As for T-Jack the man is godly. GODLY. Look for him to break Brady's TD record this year.

BeerBaron
08-10-2008, 08:11 PM
If our first preseason game indication Shiancoe is ever worse then I thought he was and I think he is the worst starting TE in the NFL by a good bit. Holy hell is he a piece of ****.

As for T-Jack the man is godly. GODLY. Look for him to break Brady's TD record this year.

Do INTs returned the other way count towards that? If so....he has a good chance, lol....jk man

But I am glad the Vikes have him and not say, Brett Favre. He is the one thing that allows the Bears, as bad as they are right now, to still have a chance in that division..... The Vikes will live or die this year by "T-Jack." I think things will have to get really bad for them to pull him too as he is Childress' project. Backing out on him would basically be admitting failure...not good.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 08:15 PM
that's the saddest part. tell you're unicorn and the tooth fairy I say hi.

"Kids, this brings me to my next lesson: don't smoke crack"

Yeah and when the Giants play the Eagles you'll be telling Eli to get off of his ass. He not that good, I've given reasons before. But, since it fails to register in your brain I'll post it yet again:

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%.

GB12
08-10-2008, 08:17 PM
I think something we all need to keep in mind with power rankings is that its about which team is the best team, and that doesn't necessarily reflect their final record or division status.

Would anyone argue that last season, the Jags and Titans (and obviously the Giants) were better teams than the Buccaneers? I would say they all were but who was the only one to get a home playoff game? Keep that kind of thing in mind.....
These are power rankings, not standings projections. You vote for which team you think is the worst, not which will have the worst record.

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 08:18 PM
I will still hold out hope that Jackson's great performance in the Vikings first preseason game is a sign of things to come. Then again I have said that before and been way off. T-Jack is kind of like Vince Young, when he plays his team always seems to win regardless of how bad he plays. Then again I hate Childress as a coach and I think it is crucial to have a great TE for a guy like Jackson, something we for sure do not have. The division is for sure up for grabs but I stand by my statement that we will win it handily.

I think the division will end up with 1. Vikings 2. Bears 3. Packers. 4. Lions

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 08:22 PM
Can we move on to #13 now?

BeerBaron
08-10-2008, 08:22 PM
These are power rankings, not standings projections. You vote for which team you think is the worst, not which will have the worst record.

Isn't that exactly what I said in there with the whole bit about "its about which team is the best team, and that doesn't necessarily reflect their final record or division status."

OzTitan
08-10-2008, 08:45 PM
Now I get why there are no NFC East teams off the board and 2 AFC South teams off the board. Fanbases.

That just clicked, did it? :)

princefielder28
08-10-2008, 08:53 PM
I think Philly is worse than Washington

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 08:54 PM
Oh god, here we go again-

why do you think that?

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 08:57 PM
That just clicked, did it? :)

Haha, it did as I was arguing with them. There's about 5-10 total active posters that are AFC South fans, compared to about 50 active NFC East fans.

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 09:00 PM
guys, guess what? I KNOW ELI IS A MEDIOCRE QB! I know he's average/mediocre.

but guess what, he won't be the giants "downfall". he hasn't hurt us yet bringing us to 3 straight playoff appearances and a Super Bowl ring, so there's that

703SKINS202
08-10-2008, 09:00 PM
Oh god, here we go again-

why do you think that?

Who cares thats what he thinks. He cant prove the skins will be better than the eagles just like you cant prove the eagles will be better than the skins.

princefielder28
08-10-2008, 09:01 PM
Oh god, here we go again-

why do you think that?

The Redskins have a very strong front 7 and a secondary that performs above their given talent. The Skins offense has a new dynamic with Jim Zorn as coach and when you factor in a Portis/Betts combo, they can score with the best of them.

I'm not saying the Eagles are a bad team, but they have more holes/question marks than the Skins do. Samuel was a big time signing, but will he fit in the Eagles system? A team without a true #1 WR and will their O-line hold up?

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 09:02 PM
guys, guess what? I KNOW ELI IS A MEDIOCRE QB! I know he's average/mediocre.

but guess what, he won't be the giants "downfall". he hasn't hurt us yet bringing us to 3 straight playoff appearances and a Super Bowl ring, so there's that

Well, if he continues his play from the end of last season, that's definitely going to change.

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 09:06 PM
Well, if he continues his play from the end of last season, that's definitely going to change.

I feel the same way, he could easily turn into a very good QB. I have hope for him, the first 6-8 games or so this season will be very telling

but he could win MVP and guys likee ef45 would be like: Eli sucks, he's mediocre and every young player on the eagles is a star in the making

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 09:10 PM
If Eli would win MVP, then I would not say he sucks, if he was good enough to win NFL MVP then I would not bash him.

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 09:11 PM
Eli as the MVP? ELI?

It is all about the man who puts all other DE's to shame.

TRENT COLE 4 MVPZ!!!!

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 09:12 PM
Trent Cole 4 Mvpz!!!

Thats just stupid

scottyboy
08-10-2008, 09:14 PM
If Eli would win MVP, then I would not say he sucks, if he was good enough to win NFL MVP then I would not bash him.

Didn't he win Super Bowl MVP?

just wondering...

bearsfan_51
08-10-2008, 09:24 PM
So did Larry Brown.

Dam8610
08-10-2008, 09:26 PM
and Dexter Jackson

princefielder28
08-10-2008, 09:26 PM
So did Larry Brown.

Dexter Jackson is another notable

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 09:27 PM
Didn't he win Super Bowl MVP?

just wondering...

thats one game, not a whole season. He is mediocre, he went on a run during the playoffs and if he can continue playing at that pace, I've got no problem saying I was wrong, but until then it was just a hot streak.

LonghornsLegend
08-10-2008, 09:35 PM
So did Larry Brown.

Beat me to it, he was probably the most undeserving ever thanks to Neil O Donnel, he took his money soon after and was never heard of again.

yodabear
08-10-2008, 09:40 PM
How are the Packers still around? They have a tough schedule and lost a HOF QB, but its really no shock at all cuz the Packer fans are the biggest homers.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 09:41 PM
'cause Packers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seahawks

Smooth Criminal
08-10-2008, 10:07 PM
I voted Seattle. Just not a talented team. hey dont have very much on offense or defense. They'll finish with a better record than some of these teams, but for power rankings, this is where they belong.

BTW, Pittsburgh has an h on the end.

keylime_5
08-10-2008, 10:15 PM
How does Seattle not have much on defense? One of the best pass rushes in the NFL and they were maybe the best team in the NFC for a stretch of the season last year in between week 9 and the playoffs. They have Tatupu, Peterson, Hill as one of the best LB units in the game plus Kerney, Tapp, and Jackson at DE with Trufant as one of the best young CBs in the game. Very good defense. Offensive weapons are limited but they have a good enough system to score 20 ppg. Seattle is guaranteed to win at least 10 games this year.

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 10:25 PM
How does Seattle not have much on defense? One of the best pass rushes in the NFL and they were maybe the best team in the NFC for a stretch of the season last year in between week 9 and the playoffs. They have Tatupu, Peterson, Hill as one of the best LB units in the game plus Kerney, Tapp, and Jackson at DE with Trufant as one of the best young CBs in the game. Very good defense. Offensive weapons are limited but they have a good enough system to score 20 ppg. Seattle is guaranteed to win at least 10 games this year.

I have no clue how you can say they are guaranteed to win 10 games. Seriously, how the hell can you say that? No team is guaranteed to in 10 games and I am including teams that are way better than the Seahawks.

keylime_5
08-10-2008, 10:40 PM
I guarantee you they win at least 10. They play in a $&*# division and are definitely a way way way way better team than I've heard given credit for around here.

Dr. Gonzo
08-10-2008, 10:47 PM
I guarantee you they win at least 10. They play in a $&*# division and are definitely a way way way way better team than I've heard given credit for around here.

I just don't understand how you can guarantee a team wins 10 games in a league as unpredictable the NFL. Sure they will benefit from playing in probably the worst division in football but anything can happen.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 10:53 PM
I guarantee you they win at least 10. They play in a $&*# division and are definitely a way way way way better team than I've heard given credit for around here.

10 games? The offense is terrible. Julius Jones can't even pass Maurice Morris on the depth chart, TJ Duckett isn't that good and neither is Maurice Morris. The top 2 targets are Bobby Engram who should retire any time now and the has been in Nate Burelson. Will Heller is the top TE? Who is Will Heller? :confused: John Carlson will probably end up staring at TE and he is a rookie and rookie TEs don't usually have success in the NFL. The Defense is top-notch in the NFL. All this sounds a bit similar to the Bears doesn't it?

I can see a team finally overtaking them in the division. I don't think it will be the 49ers. The Rams have a shot but I doubt it. The Cardinals are the most likely to take 1st place over the Seahawks.

keylime_5
08-10-2008, 11:07 PM
Their offense wasn't that great last year when they had Shaun Alexander hauling dead weight, but it was still solid and efficient. This year they'll have a better running game and as long as they have Matt Hasselbeck in that system they'll put up passing yards. All their backs are good pass catchers too, it doesn't matter who their WRs are, they always produce. Engram, Burleson, and Branch when he gets back is really a little above average compared to some of their past WR corps of the Hasselbeck era. They have a great defense though, that will be the biggest reason why they run away with the NFCWest.

Scotty D
08-10-2008, 11:08 PM
Deion Branch! Deion Branch! Seahawks will score points. Maurice Morris can actually play, so what if Julius Jones is behind him. Thats good.

Edit- My Deion Branch chant was directed towards eaglesfan, didnt' want to quote that whole thing of his, but he forgot about him.

Bucs147
08-10-2008, 11:20 PM
They haven't improved from last year I don't think, so I don't see where people get the idea that they're better than us when we beat them last year and we have improved.


Great post, etk. I totally agree. Here, I'd like to add that Bruce Gradkowski was the QB for the Bucs when they beat the Redskins. Bruce Gradkowski ! He can't even thow a ten yard pass.

10 games? The offense is terrible. Julius Jones can't even pass Maurice Morris on the depth chart, TJ Duckett isn't that good and neither is Maurice Morris.

They're still better than Shaun Alexander. The Seahawks are going to win the NFC West pretty easily, once again. As long as Walter Jones and/or Matt Hasselbeck are there, their offense will be okay. Plus, they have an excellent defense and play in one of the worst division, if not the worst.

eaglesfan_45
08-10-2008, 11:26 PM
Deion Branch! Deion Branch! Seahawks will score points. Maurice Morris can actually play, so what if Julius Jones is behind him. Thats good.

Edit- My Deion Branch chant was directed towards eaglesfan, didnt' want to quote that whole thing of his, but he forgot about him.

Deion Branch is out for the year ;)

Eaglez.Fan
08-11-2008, 07:31 AM
I don't think the Seahawks are worse than a couple teams left on this list.

And some people on this board should really pull the poll out of their asses because I cam into this thread with 1200 rep now I'm at 600. Funny people these days.

eaglesalltheway
08-11-2008, 07:35 AM
I voted Skins. I really think they probably should have gone sooner, but I definitely could see them up here too. This is really going to be tough from now on.

Gay Ork Wang
08-11-2008, 07:38 AM
thats cause ur arguments are really really bad

Eaglez.Fan
08-11-2008, 07:41 AM
thats cause ur arguments are really really bad

The ONLY thing I argued is that the Texans D won't be dominant this year. There's nothing really really bad about that prediction bud.

Gay Ork Wang
08-11-2008, 07:45 AM
Are you kidding me. It's not even close. C'mon. The Eagles and Redskins blow away the Texans and are both better than the Titans. And clearly nfldc agrees with me. (the vote)
This was really ignorant and wrong at the same time

Smooth Criminal
08-11-2008, 09:36 AM
The biggest reason why they'll win the NFC West isnt anything on the Seahawks. Its the 3 other teams in the division.

Rob S
08-11-2008, 09:54 AM
skins got it locked, next.

keylime_5
08-11-2008, 10:02 AM
The biggest reason why they'll win the NFC West isnt anything on the Seahawks. Its the 3 other teams in the division.

well they beat Washington by three touchdowns in the playoffs last year so they must be doing something right. They should be just as good this year with a bolstered running game and a deeper defense.

ChezPower4
08-11-2008, 03:02 PM
SEAHAWKS! FTL! They are soooo much worse than the Redskins and the Packers

I agree but they're still going to win the NFC West though

MetSox17
08-11-2008, 03:07 PM
So can we get the next thread running?

yourfavestoner
08-11-2008, 03:42 PM
Haha, it did as I was arguing with them. There's about 5-10 total active posters that are AFC South fans, compared to about 50 active NFC East fans.

The other discrepancy is that the AFC South fans who are on this board don't think that every single player who makes a nice play in training camp or a preseason game is a future All-Pro. We have this weird, logical function called "wait and see if these guys develop or just fall to the wayside like 90% of NFL players with vast potential do." We don't come onto the boards yammering about how every position on our team is one of the most overlooked units in the NFL. We don't ***** and complain about how our teams are from small markets, and have little in the form of national exposure (except for the Colts, who would be just another small market team that nobody cared about if it weren't for Peyton). The funny thing is, is that we COULD be as obnoxious as fans of the other teams, but we're not. The lack of exposure and acknowledgment has given the AFC South teams and fans a "who really gives a **** what ESPN, and idiot fans across the country think about our team" mentality.

It is what it is.

21ST
08-12-2008, 12:05 AM
The other discrepancy is that the AFC South fans who are on this board don't think that every single player who makes a nice play in training camp or a preseason game is a future All-Pro. We have this weird, logical function called "wait and see if these guys develop or just fall to the wayside like 90% of NFL players with vast potential do." We don't come onto the boards yammering about how every position on our team is one of the most overlooked units in the NFL. We don't ***** and complain about how our teams are from small markets, and have little in the form of national exposure (except for the Colts, who would be just another small market team that nobody cared about if it weren't for Peyton). The funny thing is, is that we COULD be as obnoxious as fans of the other teams, but we're not. The lack of exposure and acknowledgment has given the AFC South teams and fans a "who really gives a **** what ESPN, and idiot fans across the country think about our team" mentality.

It is what it is.

Just to let you know all that sounds like crying

ALD
08-12-2008, 11:42 AM
The Seahawks have a very impressive D adn Hasselback will move the chains and get points. They may not blow you away on paper but they're a good team, even though i personally think that if the Cards Oline gels and Leinart can step up they'll surpass the Seahawks this season, but that's a mighty big minus.