worst team in football ? - Page 2

Smooth Criminal · 11-20-2006, 09:18 PM

I don't thionk you can say the Texans have been the worst over the last 5-10 years considering they havn't even been in the league 5 years.

TitleTown088 · 11-20-2006, 09:18 PM

detroit has gotta win, didn't the raiders go to the superbowl fairly recently
?

GB12 · 11-20-2006, 09:20 PM

1. Detroit
2.Arizona

diabsoule · 11-20-2006, 09:26 PM

Why aren't the Lions on the poll? They're horrible.

NIN1984 · 11-20-2006, 09:27 PM

If its 5-10 years Raiders are not the worst team...

Won the AFC Championship

Played in Super Bowl 37 (yeah i know they lost)

Won the AFC West 3 straight years in a row

Rich Gannon was NFL MVP

Raiders haven been crap the past 4 years not that past decade, Cards and Lions are clearly the worst teams what have they ever done?

weezer1195 · 11-20-2006, 09:30 PM

the raiders are the worst run team in the leauge but their talent level is not as horrible as their record. I think if this team had some halfway competent coaching you could give them those handful of games they blew this year that they should have won.

And you are wrong to say the raiders only had one good year in ten. Off the top of my head i seem to remember the rich gannon era as having gone pretty well. You know the tuck year, the year before when tony siragusa injured gannon in the playoffs, and they year they went to the superbowl. There you go. I dont think the cardinals or lions can compete with that.

Xonraider · 11-20-2006, 09:43 PM

The Raiders are in their lowest point of their franchise now. But the team is not a total mess. We got a oyung, improving defense, which needs a player or two to be really good. The special teams are pretty good too. As soon as Walsh is gone (and hopefully Shell) and we have actually determined players to win, we could be better.

Xonraider · 11-20-2006, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weezer1195

the raiders are the worst run team in the leauge but their talent level is not as horrible as their record. I think if this team had some halfway competent coaching you could give them those handful of games they blew this year that they should have won.

And you are wrong to say the raiders only had one good year in ten. Off the top of my head i seem to remember the rich gannon era as having gone pretty well. You know the tuck year, the year before when tony siragusa injured gannon in the playoffs, and they year they went to the superbowl. There you go. I dont think the cardinals or lions can compete with that.

If we had an offense that scored 20 points a game we could be like 6-4
or 5-5 now.

Hurricane Ditka · 11-20-2006, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zim3031

The Lions, I actually picked them to win the God damn division this year

That's because you're an idiot

BuckNaked · 11-20-2006, 09:49 PM

Vikingd suck pretty hard this year.

Kurve · 11-20-2006, 11:02 PM

if its just for offense with out a doubt raiders would be the worst mayb worst in history ..........but having a defense that is pretty damn good does bump them out of the worst team list ....a lot of bad teams this year.

Jensen · 11-20-2006, 11:04 PM

I'm not voting because the Lions aren't an option.

4pAc · 11-21-2006, 01:00 AM

Millen's next draft pick: Dwayne Jarrett

11-21-2006, 06:53 AM

Only 1 team that needs to be in this poll and that is the lions.

keylime_5 · 11-21-2006, 09:42 PM

Cleveland is better than more teams than listed. They drop Carthon and the offense all of a sudden is almost decent, they'll probably win 6 games again so they're far from the worst

21ST · 11-21-2006, 09:44 PM

3 teams with the lowest winning percentage over the last 10 years

1.Lions
2.Cardinals
3.Redskins

doingthisinsteadofwork · 11-21-2006, 10:01 PM

Oaklands D is excellent.
If you look at their offensive rankings they are at 32 in pretty much every category.So to see where their defense is ranked the defense is just phenonimal.Just need a RDE and a DT and then the defense will be set.The coaching staff on Oaklands defense is great to.
The offense actually has talent on it.Its more of the coaching.
Dont need to discuss Tom Walsh and the B&B.
Slater and Eatmen the Oline coaches have never coached either so there you go.

Iamcanadian · 11-22-2006, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

This is eeeeeeeeasily the Detroit Lions.

Have you seen their record untill Millen? It's an absolute train wreck.

How the hell are they not even an option? Are you kidding me?

How could you leave Detroit out of the pool. They are not only the worst team this year, they are the worst team for the last decade and then some.

OzTitan · 11-22-2006, 07:13 AM

I love it how the Titans are so far under the radar they're even left off "worst team in league" polls :)

But I guess if we're talking in recent history then it wouldn't make sense since they were a pretty competitive team until 2004. So yeah i'd have to say the Lions for sure.

someone447 · 11-22-2006, 09:53 AM

Detroit, possibly the worst team in history, they have had Barry Sanders and Alex Karras. Since 1930 they have won their division an ASTOUNDING 8 TIMES!!!!! They have won an NFL championship 5 of those 8 times, the latest being 1957. During the Super Bowl era, they have won the Central/North 3 times. 3 times in 40 some years. The are the Cubs of the NFL.

Grid · 11-30-2006, 01:38 AM

Texans are finally headed in the right direction with Kubiak. They will be competitive in year or two. Previous management and coaching staff had absolutely no clue as to what they were doing resulting in bad personnel decisions and wasted picks.

This not being an excuse or anything, we are who we are but the fact of matter is this year Texans are more affected by change of scheme from 34 to 43, lack of quality depth and injuries to their key players.

Transformation will be complete this off season from the previous regime from the personnel point of view. Allot of players will be let go who don't fit the 43 scheme or who are not in Texans plans of the future.

Some of the names will surprise you this off season.

For Texans, this season has been more about evaluating personnel.

stephenson86 · 11-30-2006, 01:50 AM

washington should be on there

nobodyinparticular · 11-30-2006, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninerfan

Have been thinking bout this all day. Some teams that are consistant losers, promise improvement but delivery only misery, should be better than they are. well which team has been the worst over the last 5-10 yrs and why ?

My vote goes to the Texans, they consistantly promise winning seasons, had a number of high draft picks, have players that should be or are coming to their prime, have questionable draft day picks and after 4-5 yrs still dont appear settled on their game style

Oakland in the last 10 years is here instead of Detroit? Are you **********ing kidding me?

Oakland:
2006 2-9 Pick TBD
2005 4-12 #7 pick
2004 5-11 #7 pick
2003 4-12 #2 pick
2002 11-5 AFC Champs
2001 10-6 AFC West Champs-Snow Bowl agianst Patriots
2000 12-4 AFC Title game
1999 8-8
1998 8-8
1997 4-12
1996 7-9

Would you like to compare to Detroit?
2006 2-9 Pick TBD
2005 5-11 #9 pick
2004 6-10 #10 pick
2003 5-11 #7 pick
2002 3-13 #2 pick
2001 2-14 #3 pick
2000 9-7
1999 8-8
1998 5-11
1997 9-7
1996 5-11

The Lions, over the last 10 full seasons have had 2 winning seasons and 1 at .500. They had 5 straight years with top 10 picks and they are looking season 6 straight in the eyes. The Raiders have had 3 fully terrible seasons with 4 or 5 wins, 3 very very good seasons over 10 wins (and going deep into the playoffs), 2 building seasons at .500 and then a very bad one under Joe Bugel and a bad one (at 7-9) to end White's tenure. That's 2 at .500, 3 well over .500, 4 well below .500 and one just under .500.

The Raiders have a darn good defense and all of them are young and learning. The offense is crappy right now, but they have the chance to grow. The stretch they had of good seasons for 3 years was right up there with the Rams, the Packers of a few years earlier and the Patriots that was just starting. The only difference is they didn't git er dun in the playoff games. (again, 2000 Ravens in the AFC Title game and the Snow Bowl in 2001 against the Patriots)

The Lions? Uh..... Yeah.... They drafted Charles Rogers...

Turtlepower · 11-30-2006, 02:14 AM

Have you noticed the coralation between the Lions and Ford. Both of them are just tanking, so that is why Toyota needs to buy the team. =D

Mr. Stiller · 11-30-2006, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roughrider30

I think it is Arizona, with Detroit a close second. The reason for this is Detroit has had one bright spot in their history, Barry Sanders.

Arizona hasnt even had someone like that. They have had pretty much nothing but misery. This year was supposed to be an up year for them and look how it turned out.

Even without Sanders, Batch Actually led them.. Robert Porcher, and That WR who's name always slips my mind.. GRR. Herman Moore and Johnnie Morton.