PDA

View Full Version : AFC West: who do YOU think is their best team?


J-Mike88
01-01-2012, 06:20 PM
All BS aside, which team do you believe is the best of that schit right now?
They're all 8-8 now right, except the Chiefs who are 7-9.

PoopSandwich
01-01-2012, 06:34 PM
Make a thread about the NFC the second the game goes final and have witty remarks about every team.

robert pancake gallery
01-01-2012, 06:35 PM
All Romeo Does Is Win Gamezzzzzzzzz

Bengalsrocket
01-01-2012, 06:54 PM
The team that won the division is the best imo. I know it shouldn't be that black and white, but it's just how I feel.

descendency
01-01-2012, 06:57 PM
None of them are worth a ****. I picked SD because I feel they have the most talent, though.

nobodyinparticular
01-01-2012, 09:03 PM
The team that won the division is the best imo. I know it shouldn't be that black and white, but it's just how I feel.

Three teams went 8-8. Is it really that cut and dry?

All things equal--health specifically--I like the Raiders a smidge more than the Chiefs.

I will be interested to see this Raider team with a HC who can actually focus on coaching rather than personnel moves and a QB who doesn't come in entirely out of shape by about 15 lbs. Hue Jackson was entirely too over stretched after the death of Al Davis.

Oh yeah, and please give me a real defensive coordinator.

Brodeur
01-01-2012, 09:11 PM
The Lions. 4-0 with an over 100 point differential, so clearly they win. Otherwise, I guess the Chargers but nobody is good here.

Hurricanes25
01-01-2012, 09:13 PM
I chose San Diego because I feel they have the most talent. Maybe Oakland if McFadden was healthy.

KCStud
01-01-2012, 09:16 PM
KC was 1 blocked FG away from winning the division, and that's without Eric Berry, Jamaal Charles, Tony Moeaki and Matt Cassel (for half the year).

Depends. If SD gets Bill Cowher, than they are going to be the best next year. Anyone else, I take KC.

I think KC has just as much talent as SD.

Basileus777
01-01-2012, 09:35 PM
Is this 2009? How does San Diego have the most talent? Now if you want to say that they have the best quarterback, that's a good argument. Swap Rivers with one of the other AFC West QBs and the Chargers are one of the worst teams in the league.

SchizophrenicBatman
01-01-2012, 09:44 PM
I mean, it's the Chargers but with the major caveat that they're the Chargers

nepg
01-01-2012, 10:13 PM
A healthy Chiefs team without Haley is easily the best team in the division.

nobodyinparticular
01-01-2012, 10:46 PM
KC was 1 blocked FG away from winning the division, and that's without Eric Berry, Jamaal Charles, Tony Moeaki and Matt Cassel (for half the year).

Depends. If SD gets Bill Cowher, than they are going to be the best next year. Anyone else, I take KC.

I think KC has just as much talent as SD.

Yes and the Raiders were a Calvin Johnson streak pattern from winning the division. And they were down their starting QB, star RB, 3 WRs for most of the season, their top DE, and their top DT was hobbled for the last 10 games.

All in the midst of their owner and face of the franchise dying in the middle of the season, leaving their rookie head coach to play GM, mouth of the franchise, offensive coordinator and head coach.

vidae
01-01-2012, 11:40 PM
Losing Campbell might have helped you. Losing Cassel meant we had to play Palko.

You lost McFadden in what, week 5? We lost Charles in week 2. And sorry, I'd be hard pressed to put any of your defensive players (outside of Seymour) against Eric Berry, even at this point.

If the Chiefs had competent QB play we would have destroyed this division, without Berry and Charles.

J-Mike88
01-01-2012, 11:46 PM
Losing Campbell might have helped you. Losing Cassel meant we had to play Palko.

You lost McFadden in what, week 5? We lost Charles in week 2. And sorry, I'd be hard pressed to put any of your defensive players (outside of Seymour) against Eric Berry, even at this point.

If the Chiefs had competent QB play we would have destroyed this division, without Berry and Charles.
I agree, and the fact that you lost those studs so early, and then almost overcame having to play Tyler Palko, is pretty impressive.

But the Raiders really suffered without McFadden too.... Bush was solid, but Run DMC was a playmaker.

I hate *** injuries.... wish Charles, Berry, McFadden, Moreno,Mathews could stay healthy and we could see the best players on the field.

There seems to be no right or wrong answer here.

Brodeur
01-01-2012, 11:48 PM
I agree, and the fact that you lost those studs so early, and then almost overcame having to play Tyler Palko, is pretty impressive.

But the Raiders really suffered without McFadden too.... Bush was solid, but Run DMC was a playmaker.

I hate *** injuries.... wish Charles, Berry, McFadden, Moreno,Mathews could stay healthy and we could see the best players on the field.

There seems to be no right or wrong answer here.

I thought you said best players on the field.

nepg
01-01-2012, 11:49 PM
Also, the Chiefs really didn't have Baldwin for half the season, either. And he was an absolute stud when he had Cassel looking for him.

J-Mike88
01-01-2012, 11:49 PM
Pittsburgh @ Denver
Pittsburgh @ Oakland
Pittsburgh @ Kansas City
Pittsburgh @ San Diego

I think everyone outside the respective cities would much rather watch the Steelers @ Chargers.

J-Mike88
01-01-2012, 11:50 PM
I thought you said best players on the field.
Alright, how about a healthy McGahee instead?

Shane P. Hallam
01-01-2012, 11:50 PM
Give me a new coach and GM for SD, and I think they would have won the division.

nepg
01-02-2012, 12:32 AM
Give me a new coach and GM for SD, and I think they would have won the division.
The window of them being more talented than the other teams in the AFC West is closed. They aren't more talented anymore. The Raiders and Chiefs both have more talent, but both also had to deal with a lot of ******** this season.

The Chargers were relatively healthy and just weren't good enough this year.

Timbathia
01-02-2012, 12:32 AM
As it stands, the answer is none. There is no best team. saying team x has the most talent as answer for best team is pointless and debatable. They are all weak teams, either from talent, coaching, or by having a trebuchet-wielding caveman for a QB.

Smooth Criminal
01-02-2012, 12:36 AM
SD without a doubt. I know I'd much rather see the Steelers going into any other city than SD from that division for their game this week.

SD has a ton of talent and the best QB of the bunch. They played well below their level, like many other years, but I still think they have the most talented roster.

None are very good, but I can say no one wanted to see SD sneak into the playoffs, much like Philly in the NFC.

Shane P. Hallam
01-02-2012, 12:41 AM
The window of them being more talented than the other teams in the AFC West is closed. They aren't more talented anymore. The Raiders and Chiefs both have more talent, but both also had to deal with a lot of ******** this season.

The Chargers were relatively healthy and just weren't good enough this year.

Exactly why a different coach may have done a game or two better IMO.

Timbathia
01-02-2012, 12:41 AM
I know I'd much rather see the Steelers going into any other city than SD from that division for their game this week

Will Clark play next week? The drawback of the steelers having to play Denver is his health, right?

defensiveback23
01-02-2012, 01:50 AM
What definition of healthy is being used in regards to the Chargers? Like, really? Two very good OL in McNeill and Dielman are on IR. Both Green and Vazquez missed a good amount of time too. Our LT situation was a disaster until Gaither came in. Look no further than the first Raiders game to see how bad of a situation it was. For a long stretch of games Rivers was constantly running for his life. He had no time to hit receivers. None. At one point Clary, one of the worst RT's in the game, was our best starting lineman. In a pass happy offense in a pass happy league not having a competent oline is one of the worst problems you can have. Having street free agents starting with zero time to build chemistry is one of the worst scenarios in the league. Gaither almost saved them along with Green and Vazquez being healhy. It is not happenstance they went 4-1 with those guys to finish the year.

Then there is the whole Gates injury. One day he was good the next he could barely walk. He was a shell of himself for a large portion of the year. He really came on towards the end.

Shaun Phillips, our best defender perhaps, missed a lot of time. We lack a good pass rush, but without him it was terrible. Castillo, while not great missed the year too. Floyd, maybe PR's favorite target missed time and Kaeding was done after the opening kickoff.

Yeah, we were healthy.

If we are going to play the what-if game the Chargers win hands down. The Chargers fumbled a snap in almost chipshot range against the Chiefs at the end of a game they eventually lost.

Sure we don't have the talent of a few years ago but there is still plenty on the team. Plenty. With a halfway decent oline after McNeill got hurt this conversation never would have even been started.

nepg
01-02-2012, 01:52 AM
Exactly why a different coach may have done a game or two better IMO.
A better OC situation could have done 4 games better for the Chiefs, though.

BloodBrother
01-02-2012, 01:54 AM
SD probably had the most talent at the end of the year, but I'm slurping on some KC. Just wish they would get a legit QB. Love their corners, love me some Eric Berry and Tamba Hali and Jamaal Charles is deliciously awesome

that's the team I like the most going forward in that division. Crazy Haley being gone only helps things. Too bad they were buttraped with key injuries this year

get that QB KC and the winzzzz will be flowing

GaMeTiMe
01-02-2012, 02:06 AM
San Diego is the best team in the division, and it's because of Rivers. Are Palmer, Tebow or Orton even relatively in his league? It was cool to pretend there was something wrong with him early in the year when they were horrible, and easier to do so with the fumbled snap against KC, but missing Gates and an offensive line is having enough wrong already and there was clearly nothing more. Even Jackson, Floyd and Mathews were in and out of the lineup.

I like KC's defense a LOT more than SD's, I like their core of talent a lot more and I can even say I think they're headed in a better direction. But it's not going to happen until they find their QB, and that guy isn't on the roster yet. If they swing and miss, the rest of the team will be gone before they know it. I can't appoint them the "best" team in the division - San Diego can tinker with a few things and still have the franchise QB to put the season on the shoulders of, KC needs all of their explosive young talent to have a consistently good season together to bail out whoever they trot out there at QB to hopefully be an elite game-manager.

I'm not trying to say the best teams are ranked by their QBs, so please no one respond with "OHHH THAT MEANS THE EAGLES ARE BETTER THAN THE TEXANS THIS YEAR?!?!", but the rest of San Diego's roster is respectable enough to still consider them the better team, they are better off at a lot of other positions than KC is at QB.

As I type this, SD holds the title of "best team" in the AFC West - but through the off-season and going into next year, Rivers vs. Orton aside, it doesn't mean they'll be the favorites to win the division. KC is undoubtedly one of the exciting, up and coming teams in the entire league.

bantx
01-02-2012, 02:55 AM
I think we all equally sucked and all had our injury problems.

This turned into a AFC West Homerfest real fast, I will try not to be my usual homer-self.

I'll just start with the bolts
SD - Injuries we had a lot of it. Our o-line was crippled losing out on Dielman and McNeil. You can say Rivers was having a bad year, but really when you got hit as many times as Rivers has been hit this year no QB would look good throwing with this OL. I'm not completely defending him, he's thrown a few really bad balls, but it all falls back to the OL.
Started 4-1 and ended 4-1; during our 6 game losing streak we lost nothing, but close games. I blame almost all of it on coaching. Manusky turned this defense into jello; If you watched our defensive game Manusky RARELY ever sent more then 4 on a pass rush. Our soft zone got tore up. Even with all that happening our only bright spot on defense was Eric Weddle having a great year. We lost a lot of very close games that could have gone either way, only getting blown out by the lions and pats.

KC - Losing out on JCharles, Cassel, and Flowers hurt them a lot. Watching KC backups stepping in was painful. A lot of Chiefs fan seem to think Cassel isn't worth a damn, but after seeing how ugly the passing game got when he left was apparent that he wasn't as bad as they made him out to be. He's not amazing by any means. I do think they pass on a QB in the draft unless there is a change upstairs. We will now see the shoot out of Orton and Cassel (Waits for Vidae)

Denver - Denver has a solid defense Talented team, but how far can they push with the tebz playing RB at the QB position. I can't even explain Denver's season or pin point what I exactly want to say about them.

Raiders - Where do I start. This team is very talented and young, Darren McFadden and Michael Bush can carry this team for a long long time. If DMC can stay healthy this team is dangerous. Campbell did exactly what they needed him to do, manage the game. Everything was clicking for them until injuries hit. Then came the worst trade I've ever seen, Carson ******* Palmer. I could care less what anyone has to say about this trade this is my opinion. Single worst trade ever. First it's, "The Raiders are trying to win now and Carson Palmer is our man to do it." Then it was, "Palmer knows the system already he'll do fine." Then 50 Palmerceptions later, "He needs to be in the system for a full season and off season to really click with the team." He's continued to be mediocre. Now please don't tell me this trade was worth it after missing the playoffs and going 8-8 in this horrible division.


Who' the best team in the AFC West, all homerism aside, as long as Phillip Rivers is in this division Chargers will still be the best team in the AFC West. A team is as good as their QB and you can't tell me no different with all of the AFC West QB issues we've had this year.

Bengalsrz
01-02-2012, 03:56 AM
Its gotta be San Diego, though its tough to say because its been so long since we've seen the Raiders with Mcfadden. Had Mcfadden not been hurt, would Oakland be in the playoffs? Probably, but even then that doesn't tell me they are a better team than the Chargers who faced injury problems of their own. Call it a dead cat bounce if you will, but after that mid season slump, Rivers started playing at a high level again and the Chargers are looking like a very strong team again. Anyways, to me its:

1.) San Diego
2.) Oakland
3.) Denver
4.) Kansas City

And the Raiders should be on a downward spiral here thanks to being robbed by a certain Cincinnati franchise.

RaiderNation
01-02-2012, 02:09 PM
I'm giving the edge to the Raiders, to no one's surprise. If we had McFadden healthy for this whole season we could potentially be a 10 or 11 win team. He is by far our best player on the team and losing him took away so much from this offense. Palmer never even got the chance to play with DMC yet, and I can't wait for next year to see that happen...

vidae
01-02-2012, 02:16 PM
You could say the same thing for the Chiefs and Charles, except Charles isn't hurt every single year.

Jvig43
01-02-2012, 03:54 PM
Why was a thread made about this when the team that did the most to secure a playoff spot just won the division? That's like asking who was the best team in the NFL last season.

nobodyinparticular
01-02-2012, 04:09 PM
Why was a thread made about this when the team that did the most to secure a playoff spot just won the division? That's like asking who was the best team in the NFL last season.

1. 3 teams ended with the exact same record
2. The team that made the playoffs ended the season 0-3
3. The team that made the playoffs has a horrible QB
4. It could be argued multiple teams in the division are more talented
5. Injuries
6. Getting in on a tiebreaker that is not head-to-head is a pretty flimsy argument
7. This is a sports message board. People are going to talk about stuff like this.

Basileus777
01-02-2012, 04:09 PM
Why was a thread made about this when the team that did the most to secure a playoff spot just won the division? That's like asking who was the best team in the NFL last season.

There's nothing wrong with thinking Denver is the best team, but let's not act like there isn't room for debate here. All of these teams were within a game of each other and it's hardly clear that Denver is the best team among them, especially since they won the division after a losing streak. Did Green Bay win the Superbowl and become the best team in the NFL last season by losing its last three games? That comparison isn't really valid.

Jvig43
01-02-2012, 04:23 PM
I guess I just look at it as every team knows what it takes to get into the playoffs. So the Bronco's backed into the playoffs after losing three straight, no other team decided to take advantage of that, and that's why they aren't in (specifically the Raiders.). I don't see how any other team was any more deserving than the team that got in (everyone in the AFC west was very inconsistent). That's just may take.

J-Mike88
01-02-2012, 05:13 PM
1. 3 teams ended with the exact same record
2. The team that made the playoffs ended the season 0-3
3. The team that made the playoffs has a horrible QB
4. It could be argued multiple teams in the division are more talented
5. Injuries
6. Getting in on a tiebreaker that is not head-to-head is a pretty flimsy argument
7. This is a sports message board. People are going to talk about stuff like this.
That's right.
A lot of people here are at that time of the month apparently.

If people disagree with their viewpoint, they get their panties in a wad.

There's plenty of debate here that's worthy.
Plus has any division had as many key injuries as this one?

J-Mike88
01-02-2012, 05:16 PM
As it stands, the answer is none. There is no best team. saying team x has the most talent as answer for best team is pointless and debatable. They are all weak teams, either from talent, coaching, or by having a trebuchet-wielding caveman for a QB.
What the hell is this, balderdash?
Who uses that word?