I contend the NFC East is the toughest division.

[Mr. Stiller]

People may argue the AFCN, NFCS... but the NFCE is it.

Why?

Look at the top 10 teams in defense. Then look at the top 10 teams in terms of offense.

Now look at the only 3 teams that are in the top 10 in both...


Dallas, New York Giants and Philadelphia.


That is insane.

[Sniper]

I contend that the Pope is Catholic.

[Gay Ork Wang]

They had a fairly rough schedule too afair

[gsorace]

Who's arguing for the AFC north?

[Mr. Stiller]

Who's arguing for the AFC north?

Not this season, but there have been a few seasons where I would've argued for it.

It does house the top 2 defenses nearly every season.

[DMWSackMachine]

Yeah, I think the South is a bit of a paper tiger this year. Its good, but I don't think it belongs in the conversation or that its as good as its record would indicate. Actually, I think the NFC North and AFC South are a little underrated and better than their records would indicate, and the NFC South and AFC East are overrated and not as good as theirs.

But, yes, the NFC East is a monster, and it has two teams that had bas ass dips mid-season but are playing excellent ball right now in Philly and Dallas, and one team that was awesome for a stretch early-mid season but is now pretty ugly. I believe that of all the football played this year, each of these teams at their peak make up 4 of the top 8 teams in the NFL. Right now, I'd say Philly, NY, and Dallas are all top 8 teams.

[Giantsfan1080]

The Giants are going to be the first team in NFL history to go up against 10 consecutive teams with .500 records or better. As of now they are 11-3 against that monster of a schedule with a top 10 defense and offense. That's pretty damn good if you ask me.

[etk]

Who cares about team statistics? You wanna know toughness? Try having a division where each team likely finishes with a 3-3 divisional record yet still could stand to represent 3 of the 6 conference playoff teams. How about 3 teams with 11 wins each, and a 4th with as many as 9?

That would be the NFC South.

[Mr. Stiller]

Who cares about team statistics? You wanna know toughness? Try having a division where each team likely finishes with a 3-3 divisional record yet still could stand to represent 3 of the 6 conference playoff teams. How about 3 teams with 11 wins each, and a 4th with as many as 9?

That would be the NFC South.

You're right. Who cares how efficient and top notch you team is in 2 of the 3 phases of football.. lets solely focus on W's/L's.


How is having a top 10 defense AND offense not tough?

They don't have just 1, or 2, but 3... THE ONLY 3 in the league.

[Sniper]

Who cares about team statistics? You wanna know toughness? Try having a division where each team likely finishes with a 3-3 divisional record yet still could stand to represent 3 of the 6 conference playoff teams. How about 3 teams with 11 wins each, and a 4th with as many as 9?

That would be the NFC South.

Strength of schedule plays into that.

[BlindSite]

Yeah, I think the South is a bit of a paper tiger this year. Its good, but I don't think it belongs in the conversation or that its as good as its record would indicate. Actually, I think the NFC North and AFC South are a little underrated and better than their records would indicate, and the NFC South and AFC East are overrated and not as good as theirs.

But, yes, the NFC East is a monster, and it has two teams that had bas ass dips mid-season but are playing excellent ball right now in Philly and Dallas, and one team that was awesome for a stretch early-mid season but is now pretty ugly. I believe that of all the football played this year, each of these teams at their peak make up 4 of the top 8 teams in the NFL. Right now, I'd say Philly, NY, and Dallas are all top 8 teams.

As a whole the division has lost two games on their homefield/s and three of the teams are in position for the playoffs. Three of the teams are in the playoff hunt and a fourth will likely finish with a winning record.

The south might not necessarily be on par with the East in every category, but they're certainly not overrated.

[nrk]

Who cares about team statistics? You wanna know toughness? Try having a division where each team likely finishes with a 3-3 divisional record yet still could stand to represent 3 of the 6 conference playoff teams. How about 3 teams with 11 wins each, and a 4th with as many as 9?

That would be the NFC South.

I agree about the NFC South. Dallas, Philly, and Washington are just too off/on. You don't know which team will show up. Hopefully the Giants get Brandon Jacobs back soon because I don't think Eli is going to win games by himself without Burress and Jacobs.

[Mr. Stiller]

Strength of schedule plays into that.

Yeah.

Rank…….TEAM………………SOS……2007 Win%

1. Pittsburgh Steelers………..0.598……… .625
2. Indianapolis Colts………...0.594……… .813
3. Jacksonville Jaguars………0.559……… .688
4. Baltimore Ravens…………0.551……… .313
5. Minnesota Vikings………..0.551……… .500
6. Cincinnati Bengals………..0.547……… .438
7. Cleveland Browns………...0.547……… .625
8. Houston Texans…………..0.547……… .500
9. Detroit Lions……………..0.543………. .438
10. Tennessee Titans………….0.543……… .625
11. Chicago Bears…………….0.532……… .438
12. Green Bay Packers………..0.532……… .813
13. Dallas Cowboys…………..0.524……… .813
14. Washington Redskins……..0.524……... .563
15. New York Giants………….0.520……... .625
16. Philadelphia Eagles………..0.520…….. .500
17. St. Louis Rams…………….0.489…….. .188
18. San Francisco 49ers……….0.485…….. .313
19. Seattle Seahawks………….0.477…….. .625
20. Tampa Bay Buccaneers…...0.469…….. .563
21. Arizona Cardinals…………0.465…….. .500
22. Carolina Panthers………….0.465……. .438
23. Miami Dolphins…………...0.465…….. .063
24. Atlanta Falcons……………0.461…….. .250
25. New York Jets…………….0.457…….. .250
26. Kansas City Chiefs………..0.453…….. .250
27. New Orleans Saints……….0.450…….. .438
28. Buffalo Bills………………0.449…….. .438
29. Denver Broncos…………...0.446…….. .438
30. Oakland Raiders…………..0.438…….. .250
31. San Diego Chargers……….0.422……. .688
32. New England Patriots……..0.387…….1.000


All 4 of the NFCS teams had a 20 or lower SOS... NFC east was 13-16

That said the AFCS/N had the highest collective SOS's

Here is how the eight divisions averaged out, most to least difficult:

AFC South…...0.561

AFC North…..0.559

NFC North…..0.540

NFC East……0.522

NFC West..…0.479

NFC South…..0.461

AFC East……0.440

AFC West…..0.440

Division………in Division……..out of Division…….Ave. SOS

NFC East……..NFC West………AFC North…………0.522

NFC North……NFC South……..AFC South…………0.540

NFC South……NFC East……….AFC West………….0.461

NFC West…….NFC North……...AFC East…………..0.479


if the NFC South had the NFC West and AFC west this year.. they'd have to set a record for lowest SOS.

[GB12]

You have to use the strength of schedule from this season, not from their records last year.

[Gay Ork Wang]

I believe the Bills, Lions and Chiefs had the strongest schedule, could be the Bengals though

[BlindSite]

The NFC South had a low SOS in part because they played each other so often and the only team last year in the NFC S with a decent record was our playoff representatives...

So having Carolina, Atlanta and New Orleans hurt anyone in the NFC S SOS when this year they've been vastly improved.

Secondly the NFC South played the NFC NORTH this year. Carolina beat Detroit, Green bay, Chicago and lost to Minnesota in an unusual series of events.

The Panthers Swept the AFC West and walloped the broncos who'd to that point swept the NFC South.

San Diego
Chicago
Minnesota
Kansas City
Arizona
Oakland
Detroit
Green bay
Denver
New York

Tampa
Atlanta
New Orleans

Bolded are teams who can still (in one way or another) make the playoffs from Carolina's schedule, which would've been the second toughest in the division. That's 10 games against potential play off teams and they only lost to their divisional opponent and minnesota.

Tampa would've instead played the Cowboys and Seattle

Atlanta played the Eagles and St Louis

New Orleans played the Redskins and the 49ers

That's not that easy of a schedule for anyone.

[Im_a_Romosexual]

Who cares about team statistics? You wanna know toughness? Try having a division where each team likely finishes with a 3-3 divisional record yet still could stand to represent 3 of the 6 conference playoff teams. How about 3 teams with 11 wins each, and a 4th with as many as 9?

That would be the NFC South.

If one of the teams could go on the road and beat a divisional foe in their house, then I can take them more seriously

[d34ng3l021]

The rankings are not that far off.

Scoring offenses:

NO: 1
CAR: 7
ATL: 12
TB: 19

NYG: 4
PHI: 6
DAL: 13
WAS: 29

Scoring Defenses:

TB: 5
CAR: 6
ATL: 11
NO: 25

NYG: 4
WAS: 7
PHI: 9
DAL: 13

NO and WAS are similar, except their strengths are opposite. ATL and DAL are nearly the same in the rankings. CAR and NYG are close as well. TB is better than PHI in defense, but PHI offense is far better than TB. You look at the rankings and you can tell that the NFCS offense is better, as a whole, than the NFCE. The East's defense is better than the South's too.

[Gay Ork Wang]

The fact that the Bears or the Chargers can still make the playoffs isnt because tehy are that good

[BlindSite]

Wow, Science DROPPED

[BlindSite]

The fact that the Bears or the Chargers can still make the playoffs isnt because tehy are that good

That has no impact on the argument what so ever.

[etk]

You're right. Who cares how efficient and top notch you team is in 2 of the 3 phases of football.. lets solely focus on W's/L's.


How is having a top 10 defense AND offense not tough?

They don't have just 1, or 2, but 3... THE ONLY 3 in the league.

Because there are so many statistics in the NFL than only looking at 2-3 does you hardly any good. What about penalties? Turnovers? FGs? Red-zone efficiency?

My Bucs seem to drive the ball effectively most of the time, but it usually results in a stalled drive because of penalties and missed 3rd-downs, leading to a FG or punt.

If one of the teams could go on the road and beat a divisional foe in their house, then I can take them more seriously

We're talking about these divisions as collectives (4 teams). If 1 team was dominating it would weaken the overall strength of the division. 4 teams that are all competitive is a lot more dangerous than 1 great team and a few decent ones.

Carolina has the chance to do it @ New Orleans. We'll see if they choke or not.

[Gay Ork Wang]

That has no impact on the argument what so ever.
how is that not? I just discredited the teams to be ******* week. The NFCN and the AFC West are the #2 and #3 worst divisions in the NFL. How is that not an easy schedule?

[the_Kid]

NFC North FTW!!!!!!!!!!

[Iamcanadian]

NFC East

NY have played teams with a .507 winning record
Dallas has played teams with a .498 winning record
Philadelphia has played teams with a .516 winning record
Washington has played teams with a .498 winning record

AFC North
Pittsburgh has played teams with a .511 winning record
Baltimore has played teams with a .520 winning record
Cleveland has played teams with a .574 winning record
Cincinnati has played teams with a .574 winning record

So how can you say the NFC East is the better conference. Cleveland and Cincinnati have played the toughest schedules in the whole NFL bar none.
The NFL is a QB/schedule league where unless you have a solid QB, your chances of doing much when you happen upon a tough schedule is practically nil. This is how the NFL creates a false image of parity and allows every team some hope of reaching the playoffs at least once every 4 years. Cleveland and Cincy fans may be screaming for their HC's head but in reality neither team had any chance to have a good year with equally tough schedules.
In the NFL, there is really no way to judge conferences, the NFL likes it that way because they want people to believe the hype that parity exists. Every GM understands the reality and that is why the QB position remains the top priority for teams that lack a true franchise QB. Get one like NE, Indy and Pittsburgh and you'll likely be in the playoffs every year, don't get one and you'll only have a shot at the playoffs every 4th season or when your lucky enough to have a favourable schedule.
If you examine the winning percentage of the teams that are currently among the top 15 in the NFL, you'll see that 10 of them played a schedule where their opponents had a below .500 winning percentage and only 5 of them played a schedule with a winning percentage above .500. Only 1 of those 5 teams aren't having an excellent year from their QB's. That's life in the NFL.

http://www.gbnreport.com/weeklydraftorder.html

[Menardo75]

Don't forget about the West come on now :)

[LonghornsLegend]

So how can you say the NFC East is the better conference. Cleveland and Cincinnati have played the toughest schedules in the whole NFL bar none.

Are you really going to use that argument? So you feel Cincinnatti and Cleveland are better teams then Philadelphia & Washington? Because that's the argument, Oakland could play teams with a .700 winning percentage but that wouldn't make them the best team in the NFL either.

[RAVENS/WIZARDS/ORIOLES]

Are you really going to use that argument? So you feel Cincinnatti and Cleveland are better teams then Philadelphia & Washington? Because that's the argument, Oakland could play teams with a .700 winning percentage but that wouldn't make them the best team in the NFL either.

yea ill give it to the NFC east there stacked

[Halsey]

If the NFC South is a paper tiger then there must not be any other strong divisions that means the NFC East is the best division in a league of weak divisions....:D :roll:

The NFC South has no team with a losing record and 3 playoff contenders, but they're paper tigers? That's almost as dumb as going into a deep statistical debate about who is the strongest division. At least conference strength in college football matters because it helps boost recruiting. The best high schoolers want to play on and against strong teams. Players at an SEC or Big 12 school get the benefit of showcasing their talent against the best players. Arguing division strength in the NFL means nothing.

[d34ng3l021]

Are you really going to use that argument? So you feel Cincinnatti and Cleveland are better teams then Philadelphia & Washington? Because that's the argument, Oakland could play teams with a .700 winning percentage but that wouldn't make them the best team in the NFL either.

Not to mention, they suck. They keep losing against teams. That adds to the other team's win total. I know its being completely nit picky, but if they were better, they wouldn't give away so many wins and wouldn't have such a high SOS. Same thing goes for good teams too.

I wonder if theres a way to factor in SOS while taking out the 14 or 16 games that the certain team played. So if you are looking at Cincinnati's SOS as of now, you take out the 14 results of their games (basically taking away 11 wins, 2 losses, and 1 tie). I am not sure if that is already done though.