PDA

View Full Version : Who has the best Defense in the NFL?


07-31-2006, 07:50 PM
this year i say Ravens Defence will be a scoreing machine

what your awnsers?

draftguru151
07-31-2006, 07:51 PM
No Cowboys? :?

moc182
07-31-2006, 07:51 PM
Bears.

07-31-2006, 07:53 PM
No Cowboys? :?
if i could put 32 i would put every team

moc182
07-31-2006, 07:54 PM
Well the Cowboys are a pretty obvious top 5 D, they really should be on here.

07-31-2006, 07:57 PM
well 2 late know

07-31-2006, 07:59 PM
Bears.

sweetness34
07-31-2006, 08:06 PM
Bears.

This is a toughy. Our defense is really good and we just got even deeper over the offseason. We can put points on the board and we're very good at creating turnovers.

I think it's a toss up between Washington, Carolina, and Chicago. But I think I'll take Washington right now with the Bears #2 and Carolina #3. But my rankings could change.

bearsfan_51
07-31-2006, 08:11 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.

bearsfan_51
07-31-2006, 08:12 PM
By the way, why the hell are the Browns on here?

yourfavestoner
07-31-2006, 08:14 PM
1. Chicago
2. Jacksonville

Titans_Dynasty85
07-31-2006, 08:21 PM
The Colts and Steelers Defense needs to be in that list as well. My Top 5 Defenses are..

1. Chicago
2. Pittsburgh
3. Carolina
4. Baltimore
5. Indianapolis

President
07-31-2006, 08:23 PM
Da Bears!

Jensen
07-31-2006, 08:25 PM
1. Bears
2. Panthers
3. Redskins
4. Ravens
5. Cowboys

Smooth Criminal
07-31-2006, 08:28 PM
I love how the Steelers arn't even in the poll that just amazes me.

Regardless my vote goes to the Bears. Their defense just looks so god and it doesn't hurt their stats going against the NFC North teams 6 times a year.

draftguru151
07-31-2006, 08:29 PM
I love how the Steelers arn't even in the poll that just amazes me.

Regardless my vote goes to the Bears. Their defense just looks so god and it doesn't hurt their stats going against the NFC North teams 6 times a year.

Most of the top ones aren't. :? Why is Miami on here?

LTgiants
07-31-2006, 08:30 PM
giants :lol:

07-31-2006, 08:31 PM
1. Bears
2. Panthers
3. Redskins
4. Ravens
5. Cowboys

Panthers Vs Ravens gonna be a good game

President
07-31-2006, 08:34 PM
1. Bears
2. Panthers
3. Redskins
4. Ravens
5. Cowboys

Panthers Vs Ravens gonna be a good game
Where is it? If it is at Carolina, I easily say the Panthers win.

07-31-2006, 08:34 PM
man i dream that Brandon Merriweather joins the Baltimore Ravens

07-31-2006, 08:36 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?

bearsfan_51
07-31-2006, 08:38 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?
Oh stop it. The Bucs were first in yardage and that is only because the Bears put in their 3rd string against the Vikings in week 17. The Bears were still first in scoring (which is all that counts) even in spite of that. Any Bucs fan that actually asserts their defense was #1 without looking at the facts is just being a homer.

07-31-2006, 08:41 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?
Oh stop it. The Bucs were first in yardage and that is only because the Bears put in their 3rd string against the Vikings in week 17. The Bears were still first in scoring (which is all that counts) even in spite of that. Any Bucs fan that actually asserts their defense was #1 without looking at the facts is just being a homer.First in scoring is all that counts? So you can be first in scoring yet give up the most yards and it would matter? So you saying "first in scoring is all that matters" is false, and the bucs WERE the #1 defense last year.

I'll admit the Bears have a GREAT defense, just about everyone is a ballhawk but the bears haven't had their defense in the top 7 for 10 years straight. So I'd take Bucs defense over Bears defense any day of the week. Call me a homer all you want.

bearsfan_51
07-31-2006, 08:44 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?
Oh stop it. The Bucs were first in yardage and that is only because the Bears put in their 3rd string against the Vikings in week 17. The Bears were still first in scoring (which is all that counts) even in spite of that. Any Bucs fan that actually asserts their defense was #1 without looking at the facts is just being a homer.First in scoring is all that counts? So you can be first in scoring yet give up the most yards and it would matter? So you saying "first in scoring is all that matters" is false, and the bucs WERE the #1 defense last year.

I'll admit the Bears have a GREAT defense, just about everyone is a ballhawk but the bears haven't had their defense in the top 7 for 10 years straight. So I'd take Bucs defense over Bears defense any day of the week. Call me a homer all you want.
You're a homer. And yes scoring is all that matters. I don't care if they give up 400 yards, if they only allow 3 points your team still wins, you should know that-it's the staple of the cover 2.

The Bucs are a defense that is aging, the Bears are a defense that is rising. Yes the Bucs defense has been tremendous over the last 10 years, and Monte Kiffen will still keep them at the top of the league for years to come, but they aren't the best anymore.

07-31-2006, 08:45 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?
Oh stop it. The Bucs were first in yardage and that is only because the Bears put in their 3rd string against the Vikings in week 17. The Bears were still first in scoring (which is all that counts) even in spite of that. Any Bucs fan that actually asserts their defense was #1 without looking at the facts is just being a homer.First in scoring is all that counts? So you can be first in scoring yet give up the most yards and it would matter? So you saying "first in scoring is all that matters" is false, and the bucs WERE the #1 defense last year.

I'll admit the Bears have a GREAT defense, just about everyone is a ballhawk but the bears haven't had their defense in the top 7 for 10 years straight. So I'd take Bucs defense over Bears defense any day of the week. Call me a homer all you want.
You're a homer. And yes scoring is all that matters. I don't care if they give up 400 yards, if they only allow 3 points your team still wins, you should know that-it's the staple of the cover 2.

The Bucs are a defense that is aging, the Bears are a defense that is rising. Yes the Bucs defense has been tremendous over the last 10 years, and Monte Kiffen will still keep them at the top of the league for years to come, but they aren't the best anymore.How much do you want to bet bucs will have the #1 defense again this year?

Bearsfan123
07-31-2006, 08:46 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?
Oh stop it. The Bucs were first in yardage and that is only because the Bears put in their 3rd string against the Vikings in week 17. The Bears were still first in scoring (which is all that counts) even in spite of that. Any Bucs fan that actually asserts their defense was #1 without looking at the facts is just being a homer.First in scoring is all that counts? So you can be first in scoring yet give up the most yards and it would matter? So you saying "first in scoring is all that matters" is false, and the bucs WERE the #1 defense last year.

I'll admit the Bears have a GREAT defense, just about everyone is a ballhawk but the bears haven't had their defense in the top 7 for 10 years straight. So I'd take Bucs defense over Bears defense any day of the week. Call me a homer all you want.

i believe this poll is wrong too, but i believe Carolina has the best D in the league. They have a stellar D line, a great group of corners. The only weakness is linebackers. Safeties arent all that great either.

Tampa's D is getting old, you know that. Yeah they still have some great players but they are aging. The Bears are the NEW Bucs. Not as talented, IMO as the Bucs back in the day. But none the less a great D.

my rankings
1 Carolina
2 Pittsburgh
3 Chicago
4 Washington
5 Tampa or Cowboys

bearsfan_51
07-31-2006, 08:46 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?
Oh stop it. The Bucs were first in yardage and that is only because the Bears put in their 3rd string against the Vikings in week 17. The Bears were still first in scoring (which is all that counts) even in spite of that. Any Bucs fan that actually asserts their defense was #1 without looking at the facts is just being a homer.First in scoring is all that counts? So you can be first in scoring yet give up the most yards and it would matter? So you saying "first in scoring is all that matters" is false, and the bucs WERE the #1 defense last year.

I'll admit the Bears have a GREAT defense, just about everyone is a ballhawk but the bears haven't had their defense in the top 7 for 10 years straight. So I'd take Bucs defense over Bears defense any day of the week. Call me a homer all you want.
You're a homer. And yes scoring is all that matters. I don't care if they give up 400 yards, if they only allow 3 points your team still wins, you should know that-it's the staple of the cover 2.

The Bucs are a defense that is aging, the Bears are a defense that is rising. Yes the Bucs defense has been tremendous over the last 10 years, and Monte Kiffen will still keep them at the top of the league for years to come, but they aren't the best anymore.How much do you want to bet bucs will have the #1 defense again this year?
You're going to bet on the Bucs versus the rest of the league? I'll bet you any damn thing you want.

07-31-2006, 08:48 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?
Oh stop it. The Bucs were first in yardage and that is only because the Bears put in their 3rd string against the Vikings in week 17. The Bears were still first in scoring (which is all that counts) even in spite of that. Any Bucs fan that actually asserts their defense was #1 without looking at the facts is just being a homer.First in scoring is all that counts? So you can be first in scoring yet give up the most yards and it would matter? So you saying "first in scoring is all that matters" is false, and the bucs WERE the #1 defense last year.

I'll admit the Bears have a GREAT defense, just about everyone is a ballhawk but the bears haven't had their defense in the top 7 for 10 years straight. So I'd take Bucs defense over Bears defense any day of the week. Call me a homer all you want.
You're a homer. And yes scoring is all that matters. I don't care if they give up 400 yards, if they only allow 3 points your team still wins, you should know that-it's the staple of the cover 2.

The Bucs are a defense that is aging, the Bears are a defense that is rising. Yes the Bucs defense has been tremendous over the last 10 years, and Monte Kiffen will still keep them at the top of the league for years to come, but they aren't the best anymore.How much do you want to bet bucs will have the #1 defense again this year?
You're going to bet on the Bucs versus the rest of the league? I'll bet you any damn thing you want.How about you baby? :wink:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

bearsfan_51
07-31-2006, 08:49 PM
Umm..... :?

07-31-2006, 08:53 PM
Umm..... :?im just f'king around.
i like this face better :!:

07-31-2006, 08:57 PM
Umm..... :?im just f'king around.
i like this face better :!: :!: :!: :!: :!: :!: :!:
B :lol: TT :lol: R

07-31-2006, 08:59 PM
Umm..... :?im just f'king around.
i like this face better :!: :!: :!: :!: :!: :!: :!:
B :lol: TT :lol: RSUPER :!: :!:

Surtain & Law
07-31-2006, 09:02 PM
what do the ravens run
4-6 / 4-4 / 3-4 / 4-3 ?

Beans
07-31-2006, 09:41 PM
I voted Bucs, but who else would I vote for?

07-31-2006, 09:44 PM
what do the ravens run
4-6 / 4-4 / 3-4 / 4-3 ?actualy they run a 10-10
they ran 46 last year, and theyre going to a 4-3 this year i believe.

07-31-2006, 09:44 PM
I voted Bucs, but who else would I vote for?Houston Texans

steelersfan43
07-31-2006, 10:08 PM
hmmm miami and the browns are on it but not pittsburgh or dallas :?

yourfavestoner
07-31-2006, 10:16 PM
The Bears didn't have the benefit of an offense to support them last year. They scored points. They played with bad field position. And they were still the #1 defense in the league last year. They added Ricky Manning Jr and Dante Wesley to support at the corner position, they added Manning, Dvorack, Mark Anderson, and Jamar Williams to provide depth. This is with no disrespect to the other teams in the league with great defenses (Carolina, Pittsburgh, Washington) as I feel they are all better than the Bears as a total team, but nobody tops our defense, both starters and depth.umm no they werent, the Bucs were.

and i have a feeling this board is anti-bucs(:lol:), 2 or 3 top 5 lists and the bucs arent in any? Wow...... :?
Oh stop it. The Bucs were first in yardage and that is only because the Bears put in their 3rd string against the Vikings in week 17. The Bears were still first in scoring (which is all that counts) even in spite of that. Any Bucs fan that actually asserts their defense was #1 without looking at the facts is just being a homer.First in scoring is all that counts? So you can be first in scoring yet give up the most yards and it would matter? So you saying "first in scoring is all that matters" is false, and the bucs WERE the #1 defense last year.

I'll admit the Bears have a GREAT defense, just about everyone is a ballhawk but the bears haven't had their defense in the top 7 for 10 years straight. So I'd take Bucs defense over Bears defense any day of the week. Call me a homer all you want.

Well, the Cardinals were the 10th rated defense last season, but were 28th in points allowed. But it's okay. The fact that they gave up the 10th fewest yards obviously proves they are a top 10 defense. It doesn't matter that they gave up 24 points a game, because yards are more important than points.

Shiver
07-31-2006, 11:30 PM
It's easily the Chicago Bears, by far. They've only gotten better over the off-season. Chicago and Dallas are my NFC Front-Runners, but that's off-topic.

Ravens1991
07-31-2006, 11:38 PM
what do the ravens run
4-6 / 4-4 / 3-4 / 4-3 ?

I am preety sure a mix of 4-4 and 4-3.

nobodyinparticular
07-31-2006, 11:57 PM
this year i say Ravens Defence will be a scoreing machine

what your awnsers?

No Oakland? :?

:P Just kidding. I'll go with... Dallas.

bearsfan_51
08-01-2006, 12:03 AM
Bearsfan's Defensive Rankings

I didn't give the ranking a WHOLE lot of thought so don't jump down my throat if your team is 7th and you think they should be 3rd.

1)Bears
2)Chargers
3)Washington
4)Pittsburgh
5)Carolina
6)Tampa
7)Seattle
8)Dallas
9)Jacksonville
10)Baltimore
11)Denver
12)New England
13)New York Giants
14)Minny
15)Cleveland
16)Miami
17)Philly
18)Atlanta
19)Indy
20)Buffalo
21)Green Bay
22)Kansas City
23)Cincy
24)Detroit
25)St.Louis
26)Raiders
27)Arizona
28)New York Jets
29)Houston
30)San Fran
31)Tennessee
32)New Orleans

nobodyinparticular
08-01-2006, 12:06 AM
this year i say Ravens Defence will be a scoreing machine

what your awnsers?

No Oakland? :?

:P Just kidding. I'll go with... Dallas.

Crud! Nevermind, Dallas gets 2nd place. Bears get first. Brain fart. Those things happen after 8 hour days.

bigbluedefense
08-01-2006, 08:24 AM
I say this with all due respect to Bears fans. I personally like the Bears, I respect the old school teams. Having that said....

Cover 2 $ucks. Thats why the Bears cannot be the best defense in the league. Ive said this before and I still believe it, Cover 2 (Tampa 2, whatever) is a regular season defense. Its simplicity, difficulty stopping power running backs, and inability to play man defense kills it in the playoffs. If youre talking about who will have the best regular season defense, then yes Chicago's is the best.

But when you get into the playoffs, where teams study tape more thoroughly and divise gameplans etc, Cover 2 lays a big egg. Only one Cover 2 team has not choked in the playoffs, and that was the year Tampa won the SB. Look at Cover 2 every other year, they always choked in the playoffs. This year alone, the Bears, Colts, and Bucs all choked in the playoffs.

The Bears defense in the playoffs this year gave up more yards than the Giants to the Panthers....and the Giants played that game with 4th string LBs...we were a walking bruise. Yet the Bears gave up more yards. What does that tell you?

To be the best defense, you must possess the ability to play man coverage. And no cover 2 team can do that. That in itself, limits what the defense can do. That kills about 50% of the possible plays the defense can throw at a qb. Confusion is half the battle. Every qb knows whats coming at them when they play a Cover 2. Its just a matter of execution. And in the playoffs where they are able to look at a year's worth of tape and break down the weaknesses of the respective defense, the Cover 2 cannot provide a counter strategy to mask its respective weaknesses, hence going back to its simplicity as a flaw.

Thats my take. Who's the best? Thats a good question, i have Baltimore, Dallas, Carolina, Jaguars, and SD all in the same level. We can only wait and see who plays at the highest level.

08-01-2006, 08:31 AM
it seems every one say Bears - then again theres alot of bears fans on here :lol:

08-01-2006, 12:45 PM
this is obviously the bears but the cowboys and colts should be on here if the eagles are.

scorchin
08-01-2006, 12:53 PM
I'd have to say the bucs. I can only go on last years results, this year hasn't started so it's hard to say. The bears may have had a good defense last year, but then again it's not hard to be good when you play the nfc north teams twice a year. A good defense will also help you go far in the playoffs, Pittsburgh and Seattle both have very good Defenses and were the representatives in the big game. Dallas also had a good D. I'd have to rank the top 5 as this:
Bucs
Steelers
Seattle
Dallas
chargers

bearsfan_51
08-01-2006, 12:58 PM
But when you get into the playoffs, where teams study tape more thoroughly and divise gameplans etc, Cover 2 lays a big egg. Only one Cover 2 team has not choked in the playoffs, and that was the year Tampa won the SB. Look at Cover 2 every other year, they always choked in the playoffs. This year alone, the Bears, Colts, and Bucs all choked in the playoffs.

The Bears defense in the playoffs this year gave up more yards than the Giants to the Panthers....and the Giants played that game with 4th string LBs...we were a walking bruise. Yet the Bears gave up more yards. What does that tell you?
It doesn't really tell you anything at all. The Bears had a bad game. The Bears also scored points on offense which forced the Panthers to continue passing the ball whereas the Giants laid big egg on the offensive side of the ball allowing the Panthers to more or less run the clock out in the 4th quarter.

As for the cover 2 choking in the playoffs, the 2002 Bucs team was not the only sucessful Bucs team. They almost made the Superbowl in 1999 as well. The cover 2 hasn't been around that long to judge it by those standards.

bigbluedefense
08-01-2006, 01:18 PM
But when you get into the playoffs, where teams study tape more thoroughly and divise gameplans etc, Cover 2 lays a big egg. Only one Cover 2 team has not choked in the playoffs, and that was the year Tampa won the SB. Look at Cover 2 every other year, they always choked in the playoffs. This year alone, the Bears, Colts, and Bucs all choked in the playoffs.

The Bears defense in the playoffs this year gave up more yards than the Giants to the Panthers....and the Giants played that game with 4th string LBs...we were a walking bruise. Yet the Bears gave up more yards. What does that tell you?
It doesn't really tell you anything at all. The Bears had a bad game. The Bears also scored points on offense which forced the Panthers to continue passing the ball whereas the Giants laid big egg on the offensive side of the ball allowing the Panthers to more or less run the clock out in the 4th quarter.

As for the cover 2 choking in the playoffs, the 2002 Bucs team was not the only sucessful Bucs team. They almost made the Superbowl in 1999 as well. The cover 2 hasn't been around that long to judge it by those standards.

Thats not necessarily true. The Panthers came out scoring early and often. If you compare 1st half to 1st half, the Panthers put up way more yards against the bears, and the Bears didn't make it interesting until like halfway through the 2nd quarter.

I have nothing against the Bear's defensive players, I actually like the Bears, I enjoy rooting for the old school teams. I have a problem with the system. Even diehard bears fans will tell you theyre not really thrilled with the Cover 2. I know the days of the 46 Bear are gone, but a conventional 4-3 would be better imo. Even Urlacher himself said he doesn't particularly like Cover 2. I think he even said he hated it, but I'm not sure, so I won't say he did.

I think my main problem with Cover 2 is its vulnerability to power runners. Im a fan of old school football, and I cannot consider a defense the best if it has any type of vulnerability against the run. The best defense is a defense that can line it up and take on any running back any time any where. This game hasn't changed much. Its still all about running the ball and stopping the run. And if a defense is vulnerable to a certain run style, I simply cannot call it the best.

I know youre probably sick of hearing this, but take the Pitt game for example. When Chicago and Pitt both flexed their muscles, Pitt destroyed the Bears. That straight up muscle style will destroy Cover 2. Whereas a Pittsburgh for example, can line it up and muscle up against the Bears one week, then the next week spread it out and take on the Colts. They might not have the best statistical defense, but to me thats a better defense. Thats what I'm trying to say. Cover 2 has limitations. It cannot play man defense effectively, it cannot take on Big wide receivers in the vertical game, it has problems with power runners, has problems with big strong offensive lines, and its a simple playbook that will not surprise/confuse anybody which further limits its effectiveness in the postseason when teams are able to look at a year's worth of tape and dissect a defense and attack its tendencies. Cover 2 doesn't really have a counter strategy for this.

RW31
08-01-2006, 01:40 PM
1. Bears
2. Panthers
3. Redskins
4. Ravens
5. CowboysI think the Panthers will have the # 1 Defense

Pack_Attack_4
08-01-2006, 05:01 PM
packers

The Unseen
08-01-2006, 05:07 PM
packers

Um, no.

08-01-2006, 05:16 PM
packers

its best not worst

Raoul Duke
08-01-2006, 05:19 PM
ha you put the browns up there lol i love our team btu no way are we even close

njx9
08-01-2006, 05:42 PM
packers

weird that some packer fan had to say his team was the best at something... how long till they all stop by to agree?

P-L
08-01-2006, 05:44 PM
If the Panthers stay healthy, they should be the best.

08-01-2006, 05:50 PM
I'm just suprised the Browns are on the list.

Actually if you give us another year or two (maybe 3) we may be legitly towards the top.

08-01-2006, 06:09 PM
Ravens are overrated.

Shiver
08-01-2006, 06:12 PM
If the Panthers stay healthy, they should be the best.


They're Linebackers and Safeties aren't half as good as Chicago's.

08-01-2006, 06:12 PM
If the Panthers stay healthy, they should be the best.

1. Panthers
2. Bucs
3. NFC South is awesome

Bearsfan123
08-01-2006, 06:15 PM
But when you get into the playoffs, where teams study tape more thoroughly and divise gameplans etc, Cover 2 lays a big egg. Only one Cover 2 team has not choked in the playoffs, and that was the year Tampa won the SB. Look at Cover 2 every other year, they always choked in the playoffs. This year alone, the Bears, Colts, and Bucs all choked in the playoffs.

The Bears defense in the playoffs this year gave up more yards than the Giants to the Panthers....and the Giants played that game with 4th string LBs...we were a walking bruise. Yet the Bears gave up more yards. What does that tell you?
It doesn't really tell you anything at all. The Bears had a bad game. The Bears also scored points on offense which forced the Panthers to continue passing the ball whereas the Giants laid big egg on the offensive side of the ball allowing the Panthers to more or less run the clock out in the 4th quarter.

As for the cover 2 choking in the playoffs, the 2002 Bucs team was not the only sucessful Bucs team. They almost made the Superbowl in 1999 as well. The cover 2 hasn't been around that long to judge it by those standards.

Thats not necessarily true. The Panthers came out scoring early and often. If you compare 1st half to 1st half, the Panthers put up way more yards against the bears, and the Bears didn't make it interesting until like halfway through the 2nd quarter.

I have nothing against the Bear's defensive players, I actually like the Bears, I enjoy rooting for the old school teams. I have a problem with the system. Even diehard bears fans will tell you theyre not really thrilled with the Cover 2. I know the days of the 46 Bear are gone, but a conventional 4-3 would be better imo. Even Urlacher himself said he doesn't particularly like Cover 2. I think he even said he hated it, but I'm not sure, so I won't say he did.

I think my main problem with Cover 2 is its vulnerability to power runners. Im a fan of old school football, and I cannot consider a defense the best if it has any type of vulnerability against the run. The best defense is a defense that can line it up and take on any running back any time any where. This game hasn't changed much. Its still all about running the ball and stopping the run. And if a defense is vulnerable to a certain run style, I simply cannot call it the best.

I know youre probably sick of hearing this, but take the Pitt game for example. When Chicago and Pitt both flexed their muscles, Pitt destroyed the Bears. That straight up muscle style will destroy Cover 2. Whereas a Pittsburgh for example, can line it up and muscle up against the Bears one week, then the next week spread it out and take on the Colts. They might not have the best statistical defense, but to me thats a better defense. Thats what I'm trying to say. Cover 2 has limitations. It cannot play man defense effectively, it cannot take on Big wide receivers in the vertical game, it has problems with power runners, has problems with big strong offensive lines, and its a simple playbook that will not surprise/confuse anybody which further limits its effectiveness in the postseason when teams are able to look at a year's worth of tape and dissect a defense and attack its tendencies. Cover 2 doesn't really have a counter strategy for this.

your wrong about it not being confusing, especially with the Bears. The Bears are considered one of the hardest teams to "read" on offense. They disguise their coverage better than 90% of the NFL. THey just had a bad game. This year i guarantee they will do better. But as to stopping the run, in Pitts did you notice the snow? The strength of our D-Line is to get upfield, and with the snow on the field they had problems doing that because they were sliding. Yes the Bus destroyed them, yes he ran over ppl. But id still say that on any other day without snow the Bears D wins.

duckseason
08-01-2006, 06:21 PM
If the Panthers stay healthy, they should be the best.

1. Panthers
2. Bucs
3. NFC South is awesome

Until they play da Bears. They swept the South last year.

bigbluedefense
08-01-2006, 06:41 PM
But when you get into the playoffs, where teams study tape more thoroughly and divise gameplans etc, Cover 2 lays a big egg. Only one Cover 2 team has not choked in the playoffs, and that was the year Tampa won the SB. Look at Cover 2 every other year, they always choked in the playoffs. This year alone, the Bears, Colts, and Bucs all choked in the playoffs.

The Bears defense in the playoffs this year gave up more yards than the Giants to the Panthers....and the Giants played that game with 4th string LBs...we were a walking bruise. Yet the Bears gave up more yards. What does that tell you?
It doesn't really tell you anything at all. The Bears had a bad game. The Bears also scored points on offense which forced the Panthers to continue passing the ball whereas the Giants laid big egg on the offensive side of the ball allowing the Panthers to more or less run the clock out in the 4th quarter.

As for the cover 2 choking in the playoffs, the 2002 Bucs team was not the only sucessful Bucs team. They almost made the Superbowl in 1999 as well. The cover 2 hasn't been around that long to judge it by those standards.

Thats not necessarily true. The Panthers came out scoring early and often. If you compare 1st half to 1st half, the Panthers put up way more yards against the bears, and the Bears didn't make it interesting until like halfway through the 2nd quarter.

I have nothing against the Bear's defensive players, I actually like the Bears, I enjoy rooting for the old school teams. I have a problem with the system. Even diehard bears fans will tell you theyre not really thrilled with the Cover 2. I know the days of the 46 Bear are gone, but a conventional 4-3 would be better imo. Even Urlacher himself said he doesn't particularly like Cover 2. I think he even said he hated it, but I'm not sure, so I won't say he did.

I think my main problem with Cover 2 is its vulnerability to power runners. Im a fan of old school football, and I cannot consider a defense the best if it has any type of vulnerability against the run. The best defense is a defense that can line it up and take on any running back any time any where. This game hasn't changed much. Its still all about running the ball and stopping the run. And if a defense is vulnerable to a certain run style, I simply cannot call it the best.

I know youre probably sick of hearing this, but take the Pitt game for example. When Chicago and Pitt both flexed their muscles, Pitt destroyed the Bears. That straight up muscle style will destroy Cover 2. Whereas a Pittsburgh for example, can line it up and muscle up against the Bears one week, then the next week spread it out and take on the Colts. They might not have the best statistical defense, but to me thats a better defense. Thats what I'm trying to say. Cover 2 has limitations. It cannot play man defense effectively, it cannot take on Big wide receivers in the vertical game, it has problems with power runners, has problems with big strong offensive lines, and its a simple playbook that will not surprise/confuse anybody which further limits its effectiveness in the postseason when teams are able to look at a year's worth of tape and dissect a defense and attack its tendencies. Cover 2 doesn't really have a counter strategy for this.

your wrong about it not being confusing, especially with the Bears. The Bears are considered one of the hardest teams to "read" on offense. They disguise their coverage better than 90% of the NFL. THey just had a bad game. This year i guarantee they will do better. But as to stopping the run, in Pitts did you notice the snow? The strength of our D-Line is to get upfield, and with the snow on the field they had problems doing that because they were sliding. Yes the Bus destroyed them, yes he ran over ppl. But id still say that on any other day without snow the Bears D wins.

I could be wrong since I didn't see every single game last year, only the national ones for the Bears, but what do they do thats so exotic? I noticed they pretty much rush the front 4 and drop everyone back, or they come with a blitz where they send the MIKE and WILL at the qb. I really didn't notice any zone blitzing. I noticed some line stunts, buts thats about it. An occasional safety blitz, but you saw it coming from a mile away. It seems like chaos because theyre so fast, but I personally didn't notice any exotic plays.

08-01-2006, 06:47 PM
But when you get into the playoffs, where teams study tape more thoroughly and divise gameplans etc, Cover 2 lays a big egg. Only one Cover 2 team has not choked in the playoffs, and that was the year Tampa won the SB. Look at Cover 2 every other year, they always choked in the playoffs. This year alone, the Bears, Colts, and Bucs all choked in the playoffs.

The Bears defense in the playoffs this year gave up more yards than the Giants to the Panthers....and the Giants played that game with 4th string LBs...we were a walking bruise. Yet the Bears gave up more yards. What does that tell you?
It doesn't really tell you anything at all. The Bears had a bad game. The Bears also scored points on offense which forced the Panthers to continue passing the ball whereas the Giants laid big egg on the offensive side of the ball allowing the Panthers to more or less run the clock out in the 4th quarter.

As for the cover 2 choking in the playoffs, the 2002 Bucs team was not the only sucessful Bucs team. They almost made the Superbowl in 1999 as well. The cover 2 hasn't been around that long to judge it by those standards.

Thats not necessarily true. The Panthers came out scoring early and often. If you compare 1st half to 1st half, the Panthers put up way more yards against the bears, and the Bears didn't make it interesting until like halfway through the 2nd quarter.

I have nothing against the Bear's defensive players, I actually like the Bears, I enjoy rooting for the old school teams. I have a problem with the system. Even diehard bears fans will tell you theyre not really thrilled with the Cover 2. I know the days of the 46 Bear are gone, but a conventional 4-3 would be better imo. Even Urlacher himself said he doesn't particularly like Cover 2. I think he even said he hated it, but I'm not sure, so I won't say he did.

I think my main problem with Cover 2 is its vulnerability to power runners. Im a fan of old school football, and I cannot consider a defense the best if it has any type of vulnerability against the run. The best defense is a defense that can line it up and take on any running back any time any where. This game hasn't changed much. Its still all about running the ball and stopping the run. And if a defense is vulnerable to a certain run style, I simply cannot call it the best.

I know youre probably sick of hearing this, but take the Pitt game for example. When Chicago and Pitt both flexed their muscles, Pitt destroyed the Bears. That straight up muscle style will destroy Cover 2. Whereas a Pittsburgh for example, can line it up and muscle up against the Bears one week, then the next week spread it out and take on the Colts. They might not have the best statistical defense, but to me thats a better defense. Thats what I'm trying to say. Cover 2 has limitations. It cannot play man defense effectively, it cannot take on Big wide receivers in the vertical game, it has problems with power runners, has problems with big strong offensive lines, and its a simple playbook that will not surprise/confuse anybody which further limits its effectiveness in the postseason when teams are able to look at a year's worth of tape and dissect a defense and attack its tendencies. Cover 2 doesn't really have a counter strategy for this.

your wrong about it not being confusing, especially with the Bears. The Bears are considered one of the hardest teams to "read" on offense. They disguise their coverage better than 90% of the NFL. THey just had a bad game. This year i guarantee they will do better. But as to stopping the run, in Pitts did you notice the snow? The strength of our D-Line is to get upfield, and with the snow on the field they had problems doing that because they were sliding. Yes the Bus destroyed them, yes he ran over ppl. But id still say that on any other day without snow the Bears D wins.'

Portis had a nice day against the bears D also. They have a problems with power running games.

08-01-2006, 06:47 PM
If the Panthers stay healthy, they should be the best.

1. Panthers
2. Bucs
3. NFC South is awesome

wow i love how you call everyone else a homer but youre one of the biggest on the site. how can you seriously think that your elderley defense is better than the bears, cowboys, redskins, ravens and a few other teams. theyre a top 10 defense but come on.

P-L
08-01-2006, 07:01 PM
If the Panthers stay healthy, they should be the best.


They're Linebackers and Safeties aren't half as good as Chicago's.

Their LB aren't as good, but they're not that far behind either. Morgan is one of the most underrated players in the NFL and Keith Adams is a pretty solid player. I'm going to hold judgement on Chris Harris and Thomas Davis as they were rookies. But I don't think Harris/Brown are THAT much better than Minter/Williams. Also DL and CB are the most important parts of a defense, and Carolina beats Chicago in both those areas, although Chicago's DL isn't that far behind Carolina.

Canadian_kid16
08-01-2006, 07:39 PM
Well it looks liek we have the third best D

stephenson86
08-01-2006, 07:41 PM
i dont know why anyone is voting aginst the bears, they had the best defense last year and until another defense dos better you cant go against them

RCAChainGang
08-01-2006, 07:43 PM
i think the ravens are the best now that ray is back

duckseason
08-01-2006, 11:47 PM
i think the ravens are the best now that ray is back

It's not so much that Ray is back, so much as it's that he should be more free to do his job this year with the drafting of Ngata. I think the Ravens are definitely a top 10 D, but not the best. Maybe top 5. We'll see.

RCAChainGang
08-01-2006, 11:52 PM
i think the ravens are the best now that ray is back

It's not so much that Ray is back, so much as it's that he should be more free to do his job this year with the drafting of Ngata. I think the Ravens are definitely a top 10 D, but not the best. Maybe top 5. We'll see.

I really like there secondary too. There defense is put together very well.

bearfan
08-02-2006, 12:10 AM
i dont know why anyone is voting aginst the bears, they had the best defense last year and until another defense dos better you cant go against them

Well you have got the:
a) Bucs fans in denile:
They had to start their starting D all season, where as the Bears starters got to sit out week 17 to prevent injury. Add a coach who wants to keep his job (Tice) and he destroys the 2nd and 3rd team players on the Bears defense. So Bucs fans can think what they want, when the Bears starters are in they are better, and proved to be better in their own scheme.

b) Homers

C) CAROLINA IS BEASTLY

Watchman
08-02-2006, 02:46 AM
i dont know why anyone is voting aginst the bears, they had the best defense last year and until another defense dos better you cant go against them

Well you have got the:
a) Bucs fans in denile:
They had to start their starting D all season, where as the Bears starters got to sit out week 17 to prevent injury. Add a coach who wants to keep his job (Tice) and he destroys the 2nd and 3rd team players on the Bears defense. So Bucs fans can think what they want, when the Bears starters are in they are better, and proved to be better in their own scheme.

b) Homers

C) CAROLINA IS BEASTLY

Maybe. As a Buc fan I can't say that they were the best D last year. I think they were and still will be in the cream of the crop this year along with Chicago, Pitt, and Carolina. Who's the best, beats the hell out of me, and I don't care. I saw what the Bucs did to the Skins in the playoffs and it was impressive despite the loss. Bears had a damn good D too, which is young, Carolina definitely has some scary players.

And for the "the Bucs D is old" crowd - I'll believe it when I see it because I've been hearing that for about 3 years now. At the end of the day I'm more concerned about the Bucs O than their D (I imagine Bears fans feel the same way).

The Bears remind me a lot of the Bucs of about 10 years ago, but slightly less talented overall.

Bearsfan123
08-02-2006, 09:16 AM
But when you get into the playoffs, where teams study tape more thoroughly and divise gameplans etc, Cover 2 lays a big egg. Only one Cover 2 team has not choked in the playoffs, and that was the year Tampa won the SB. Look at Cover 2 every other year, they always choked in the playoffs. This year alone, the Bears, Colts, and Bucs all choked in the playoffs.

The Bears defense in the playoffs this year gave up more yards than the Giants to the Panthers....and the Giants played that game with 4th string LBs...we were a walking bruise. Yet the Bears gave up more yards. What does that tell you?
It doesn't really tell you anything at all. The Bears had a bad game. The Bears also scored points on offense which forced the Panthers to continue passing the ball whereas the Giants laid big egg on the offensive side of the ball allowing the Panthers to more or less run the clock out in the 4th quarter.

As for the cover 2 choking in the playoffs, the 2002 Bucs team was not the only sucessful Bucs team. They almost made the Superbowl in 1999 as well. The cover 2 hasn't been around that long to judge it by those standards.

Thats not necessarily true. The Panthers came out scoring early and often. If you compare 1st half to 1st half, the Panthers put up way more yards against the bears, and the Bears didn't make it interesting until like halfway through the 2nd quarter.

I have nothing against the Bear's defensive players, I actually like the Bears, I enjoy rooting for the old school teams. I have a problem with the system. Even diehard bears fans will tell you theyre not really thrilled with the Cover 2. I know the days of the 46 Bear are gone, but a conventional 4-3 would be better imo. Even Urlacher himself said he doesn't particularly like Cover 2. I think he even said he hated it, but I'm not sure, so I won't say he did.

I think my main problem with Cover 2 is its vulnerability to power runners. Im a fan of old school football, and I cannot consider a defense the best if it has any type of vulnerability against the run. The best defense is a defense that can line it up and take on any running back any time any where. This game hasn't changed much. Its still all about running the ball and stopping the run. And if a defense is vulnerable to a certain run style, I simply cannot call it the best.

I know youre probably sick of hearing this, but take the Pitt game for example. When Chicago and Pitt both flexed their muscles, Pitt destroyed the Bears. That straight up muscle style will destroy Cover 2. Whereas a Pittsburgh for example, can line it up and muscle up against the Bears one week, then the next week spread it out and take on the Colts. They might not have the best statistical defense, but to me thats a better defense. Thats what I'm trying to say. Cover 2 has limitations. It cannot play man defense effectively, it cannot take on Big wide receivers in the vertical game, it has problems with power runners, has problems with big strong offensive lines, and its a simple playbook that will not surprise/confuse anybody which further limits its effectiveness in the postseason when teams are able to look at a year's worth of tape and dissect a defense and attack its tendencies. Cover 2 doesn't really have a counter strategy for this.

your wrong about it not being confusing, especially with the Bears. The Bears are considered one of the hardest teams to "read" on offense. They disguise their coverage better than 90% of the NFL. THey just had a bad game. This year i guarantee they will do better. But as to stopping the run, in Pitts did you notice the snow? The strength of our D-Line is to get upfield, and with the snow on the field they had problems doing that because they were sliding. Yes the Bus destroyed them, yes he ran over ppl. But id still say that on any other day without snow the Bears D wins.'

Portis had a nice day against the bears D also. They have a problems with power running games.

^ that arguement annoys me. Yeah he rushed for some nice yards but in crunch time the D held strong. They didnt score a td, so Portis didnt get in the endzone, how is that a "nice day"?

bigbluedefense
08-02-2006, 09:25 AM
But when you get into the playoffs, where teams study tape more thoroughly and divise gameplans etc, Cover 2 lays a big egg. Only one Cover 2 team has not choked in the playoffs, and that was the year Tampa won the SB. Look at Cover 2 every other year, they always choked in the playoffs. This year alone, the Bears, Colts, and Bucs all choked in the playoffs.

The Bears defense in the playoffs this year gave up more yards than the Giants to the Panthers....and the Giants played that game with 4th string LBs...we were a walking bruise. Yet the Bears gave up more yards. What does that tell you?
It doesn't really tell you anything at all. The Bears had a bad game. The Bears also scored points on offense which forced the Panthers to continue passing the ball whereas the Giants laid big egg on the offensive side of the ball allowing the Panthers to more or less run the clock out in the 4th quarter.

As for the cover 2 choking in the playoffs, the 2002 Bucs team was not the only sucessful Bucs team. They almost made the Superbowl in 1999 as well. The cover 2 hasn't been around that long to judge it by those standards.

Thats not necessarily true. The Panthers came out scoring early and often. If you compare 1st half to 1st half, the Panthers put up way more yards against the bears, and the Bears didn't make it interesting until like halfway through the 2nd quarter.

I have nothing against the Bear's defensive players, I actually like the Bears, I enjoy rooting for the old school teams. I have a problem with the system. Even diehard bears fans will tell you theyre not really thrilled with the Cover 2. I know the days of the 46 Bear are gone, but a conventional 4-3 would be better imo. Even Urlacher himself said he doesn't particularly like Cover 2. I think he even said he hated it, but I'm not sure, so I won't say he did.

I think my main problem with Cover 2 is its vulnerability to power runners. Im a fan of old school football, and I cannot consider a defense the best if it has any type of vulnerability against the run. The best defense is a defense that can line it up and take on any running back any time any where. This game hasn't changed much. Its still all about running the ball and stopping the run. And if a defense is vulnerable to a certain run style, I simply cannot call it the best.

I know youre probably sick of hearing this, but take the Pitt game for example. When Chicago and Pitt both flexed their muscles, Pitt destroyed the Bears. That straight up muscle style will destroy Cover 2. Whereas a Pittsburgh for example, can line it up and muscle up against the Bears one week, then the next week spread it out and take on the Colts. They might not have the best statistical defense, but to me thats a better defense. Thats what I'm trying to say. Cover 2 has limitations. It cannot play man defense effectively, it cannot take on Big wide receivers in the vertical game, it has problems with power runners, has problems with big strong offensive lines, and its a simple playbook that will not surprise/confuse anybody which further limits its effectiveness in the postseason when teams are able to look at a year's worth of tape and dissect a defense and attack its tendencies. Cover 2 doesn't really have a counter strategy for this.

your wrong about it not being confusing, especially with the Bears. The Bears are considered one of the hardest teams to "read" on offense. They disguise their coverage better than 90% of the NFL. THey just had a bad game. This year i guarantee they will do better. But as to stopping the run, in Pitts did you notice the snow? The strength of our D-Line is to get upfield, and with the snow on the field they had problems doing that because they were sliding. Yes the Bus destroyed them, yes he ran over ppl. But id still say that on any other day without snow the Bears D wins.'

Portis had a nice day against the bears D also. They have a problems with power running games.

^ that arguement annoys me. Yeah he rushed for some nice yards but in crunch time the D held strong. They didnt score a td, so Portis didnt get in the endzone, how is that a "nice day"?

Why would the truth annoy you? 21 carries for 121 yards sounds like a good day to me. And Betts had 12 carries for 41 yards. Thats roughly a 6 yard per carry avg for Portis, and roughly 4 ypc for Betts. Yu cannot correlate redzone offense with just the run. There are multiple factors for poor redzone execution. And while the ineptness of your offense was mostly the reason for the loss, you guys still lost the game. That has to count for something as well...even though I personally give the D a pass on that one.

johnnyjonesmich
08-02-2006, 09:46 AM
The Jaguars have best defense according to NFL expert Scubbaman!
Followed by Redskins and Steelers.

08-02-2006, 09:48 AM
Carolina
Bears
Bucs
Redskins
Ravens

Finsfan79
08-02-2006, 12:49 PM
washington though I have a hard time giving it to anyone in the weak NFC

bearsfan_51
08-02-2006, 01:18 PM
washington though I have a hard time giving it to anyone in the weak NFC
The NFC will be as good, if not better, than the AFC this year. Think about all the teams that got worse in the AFC this year and all the teams that got better in the NFC. Things have changed drastically.

scorchin
08-02-2006, 01:49 PM
washington though I have a hard time giving it to anyone in the weak NFC
The NFC will be as good, if not better, than the AFC this year. Think about all the teams that got worse in the AFC this year and all the teams that got better in the NFC. Things have changed drastically. I will highly doubt that is going to happen. The NFC is still a weaker conference. Of course we won't know until the season is underway, but I just find it hard to believe it will happen. I guess it should happen sometime, it's been a long time since the NFC was comparable. I hope it happens that they becomes as good, it makes the league that much stronger.

bigbluedefense
08-02-2006, 02:01 PM
The NFC is stronger than the AFC. We have the Cowboys, Redskins and Giants in the East, maybe even the Eagles. In the South we have Carolina, Tampa, Atlanta, and possibly NO. The North has Chicago and a bunch of nobodies, and the West has Seattle.

All of those teams are legit and can give any AFC team a run for their money. NE is getting older, Miami is one Cullpepper injury away from being avg, Pittsburgh is good but most likely won't repeat, Cinncy is not gonna be good this year, Baltimore still has ? on offense, SD has a rook QB, Denver still has Plumber, and Peyton is still choking on last night's dinner.

I don't see how you can say the AFC is much more talented.

08-02-2006, 02:04 PM
The NFC is stronger than the AFC. We have the Cowboys, Redskins and Giants in the East, maybe even the Eagles. In the South we have Carolina, Tampa, Atlanta, and possibly NO. The North has Chicago and a bunch of nobodies, and the West has Seattle.

All of those teams are legit and can give any AFC team a run for their money. NE is getting older, Miami is one Cullpepper injury away from being avg, Pittsburgh is good but most likely won't repeat, Cinncy is not gonna be good this year, Baltimore still has ? on offense, SD has a rook QB, Denver still has Plumber, and Peyton is still choking on last night's dinner.

I don't see how you can say the AFC is much more talented.

will you please shut up about peyton choking? he has only choked in one playoff game in his career. i get tired of hearing about how much people think he chokes.

bigbluedefense
08-02-2006, 02:08 PM
The NFC is stronger than the AFC. We have the Cowboys, Redskins and Giants in the East, maybe even the Eagles. In the South we have Carolina, Tampa, Atlanta, and possibly NO. The North has Chicago and a bunch of nobodies, and the West has Seattle.

All of those teams are legit and can give any AFC team a run for their money. NE is getting older, Miami is one Cullpepper injury away from being avg, Pittsburgh is good but most likely won't repeat, Cinncy is not gonna be good this year, Baltimore still has ? on offense, SD has a rook QB, Denver still has Plumber, and Peyton is still choking on last night's dinner.

I don't see how you can say the AFC is much more talented.

will you please shut up about peyton choking? he has only choked in one playoff game in his career. i get tired of hearing about how much people think he chokes.

So I guess he didn't choke against the Titans at home the year they went 14-2 and were favored in the game? Or last year against Pitt? Or the year before in NE (not only did his D stink it up, but he did too, theres no denying that). I like Peyton, but I don't know if I can trust his playoff bravado anymore after last year. Say what you want about his stats, anyone who watched the game knows he didn't show up. Even before the pressure got to him he was throwing off. I don't want to spark a Peyton debate, but to say he plays at the same level in the playoffs relative to his regular season performances is just silly.

08-02-2006, 02:10 PM
the pats game was the one i was talking about where he actually did choke. Peyton came to play against the Steelers, the O-line didnt but i agree i dont want to get in another peyton debate. But remember John Elway was considered a choke artist before he won those 2 superbowls.

The Unseen
08-02-2006, 02:14 PM
But remember John Elway was considered a choke artist before he won those 2 superbowls.

Really? He had always been known as a comeback artist and actually got to the Super Bowl, only to get blown out three times.

This Elway excuse is tiring to hear.

scorchin
08-02-2006, 05:08 PM
The NFC is stronger than the AFC. We have the Cowboys, Redskins and Giants in the East, maybe even the Eagles. In the South we have Carolina, Tampa, Atlanta, and possibly NO. The North has Chicago and a bunch of nobodies, and the West has Seattle.

All of those teams are legit and can give any AFC team a run for their money. NE is getting older, Miami is one Cullpepper injury away from being avg, Pittsburgh is good but most likely won't repeat, Cinncy is not gonna be good this year, Baltimore still has ? on offense, SD has a rook QB, Denver still has Plumber, and Peyton is still choking on last night's dinner.

I don't see how you can say the AFC is much more talented. Let's see, Dallas wasn't in the playoffs, Philly was horrible. Atlanta is nothing more than a .500 team and N.O. are you kidding me? Sounds like a great NFC. Get real, the NFC is still not good.

bigbluedefense
08-03-2006, 09:44 AM
The NFC is stronger than the AFC. We have the Cowboys, Redskins and Giants in the East, maybe even the Eagles. In the South we have Carolina, Tampa, Atlanta, and possibly NO. The North has Chicago and a bunch of nobodies, and the West has Seattle.

All of those teams are legit and can give any AFC team a run for their money. NE is getting older, Miami is one Cullpepper injury away from being avg, Pittsburgh is good but most likely won't repeat, Cinncy is not gonna be good this year, Baltimore still has ? on offense, SD has a rook QB, Denver still has Plumber, and Peyton is still choking on last night's dinner.

I don't see how you can say the AFC is much more talented. Let's see, Dallas wasn't in the playoffs, Philly was horrible. Atlanta is nothing more than a .500 team and N.O. are you kidding me? Sounds like a great NFC. Get real, the NFC is still not good.

NEWSFLASH: Every year is different. Youd be a fool to think that Dallas isn't gonna be good this year, heck 3 teams from the NFC East alone are SB contenders. NO will surprise people, mark it down. They aren't that bad of a team, they threw in the towel last year bc they gave up on their coach and bc of Katrina. This year they have a real qb and added Bush, they will be a good team. Who's great in the AFC? If anything the AFC is weak, you have the Steelers, possibly the Patriots, possibly the Dolphins, and a Colts team that can't put it together in the playoffs. Thats real weak. Cinncy will have a down year, who else is there? Should I trust Jake Plummer with the Broncos? Probably not.

Jughead10
08-03-2006, 09:46 AM
Don't forget the Chiefs. Losing Roaf will hurt them, but they are always dangerous. I have them down as a playoff team this year.

keylime_5
08-03-2006, 05:58 PM
Bears right now until the Panthers and their sick middle defense proves me wrong

scorchin
08-03-2006, 07:36 PM
The NFC is stronger than the AFC. We have the Cowboys, Redskins and Giants in the East, maybe even the Eagles. In the South we have Carolina, Tampa, Atlanta, and possibly NO. The North has Chicago and a bunch of nobodies, and the West has Seattle.

All of those teams are legit and can give any AFC team a run for their money. NE is getting older, Miami is one Cullpepper injury away from being avg, Pittsburgh is good but most likely won't repeat, Cinncy is not gonna be good this year, Baltimore still has ? on offense, SD has a rook QB, Denver still has Plumber, and Peyton is still choking on last night's dinner.

I don't see how you can say the AFC is much more talented. Let's see, Dallas wasn't in the playoffs, Philly was horrible. Atlanta is nothing more than a .500 team and N.O. are you kidding me? Sounds like a great NFC. Get real, the NFC is still not good.

NEWSFLASH: Every year is different. Youd be a fool to think that Dallas isn't gonna be good this year, heck 3 teams from the NFC East alone are SB contenders. NO will surprise people, mark it down. They aren't that bad of a team, they threw in the towel last year bc they gave up on their coach and bc of Katrina. This year they have a real qb and added Bush, they will be a good team. Who's great in the AFC? If anything the AFC is weak, you have the Steelers, possibly the Patriots, possibly the Dolphins, and a Colts team that can't put it together in the playoffs. Thats real weak. Cinncy will have a down year, who else is there? Should I trust Jake Plummer with the Broncos? Probably not. It's all speculation, it means nothing until the the season is played. As of right now, I just don't see the NFC being better.