Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

Best teamin the NFC - debate


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Josh GODon said:

 

The Panthers are one of the top 3 NFC teams, ahead of the Eagles?  You mean those same Panthers that not only lost to the Eagles but we’re humiliated by the same Bears team the Eagles just throttled?  LOL. Those are some big homer glasses you’re wearing there. 

Yeah those ones. Bad lost today, but so did the eagles. Who, btw haven’t beat any team with a winning record besides the panthers. So if my team sucks that just further proves who overrated the eagles are. Congrats, you played yourself 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Packers. The NFC has a bunch of teams with good records but they’re all unproven and none are true juggernauts. Rodgers will be back, they’ll run the table and squeak into the playoffs, and no NFC D is good enough to shut Rodgers down and the solid GB offensive unit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, miasma16 said:

Not even close to being true.

Oh really?

 

Bell/Johnson/Kizer, Eagles line, Jacksonville defense, and NE/PIT/GB or whatever WRs with Kizer at QB.

 

Or

 

Rodgers with the Seahawks running backs, ARI or IND line and throwing to Giant WRs with Colts defense. 

 

Rodgers will win almost every time. Hell, look at the current Browns team. Good line, now very good WRs, solid defense, and they get smacked. Not even close to being true? It's absolutely true. No QB you will never win unless your ENTIRE defense (11 guys compared to 1) is one of the best ever. Not the case with MIN. Thinking it's not true is ridiculous. Do you watch games because if you did you wouldn't make that statement. Broncos defense is loaded and solid all around yet they're one of the worst teams because the defense has fully stopped giving a damn after having to deal with the turd offense. Which has good WRs but no QB. The example list goes on 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see arguments for the Saints, Eagles, and maybe Carolina since they are healthy now but i think the Vikings have a leg up on everyone now. Already beating the Saints, Rams, and Falcons and their only two losses are Keenums first game to a 9-2 Steelers team and when Cook was injured for the season early in the Lions game. The reason people don’t like them is there are no big names winning it on the offense for them. Keenum is legit, Thielen is legit, and their make shift offensive line is legit. If they beat Carolina next week it will be hard to pick anyone else with the caveat that the Saints play the Falcons and Carolina as well. Then you can debate on which team is better now. I lean head to head if teams have similar records but injuries etc can change that

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Panthers8912 said:

Yeah those ones. Bad lost today, but so did the eagles. Who, btw haven’t beat any team with a winning record besides the panthers. So if my team sucks that just further proves who overrated the eagles are. Congrats, you played yourself 

 

Huh?  I'm, not even an Eagles fan.  I was commenting on your ridiculous homer assertions.  The Panthers aren't even top 5 in the NFC.  How can a guy crow when his team has lost to the NFC contenders above them?  Just bizarre.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Gohawks said:

Oh really?

 

Bell/Johnson/Kizer, Eagles line, Jacksonville defense, and NE/PIT/GB or whatever WRs with Kizer at QB.

 

Or

 

Rodgers with the Seahawks running backs, ARI or IND line and throwing to Giant WRs with Colts defense. 

 

Rodgers will win almost every time. Hell, look at the current Browns team. Good line, now very good WRs, solid defense, and they get smacked. Not even close to being true? It's absolutely true. No QB you will never win unless your ENTIRE defense (11 guys compared to 1) is one of the best ever. Not the case with MIN. Thinking it's not true is ridiculous. Do you watch games because if you did you wouldn't make that statement. Broncos defense is loaded and solid all around yet they're one of the worst teams because the defense has fully stopped giving a damn after having to deal with the turd offense. Which has good WRs but no QB. The example list goes on 

Uh, so you're saying that if the Steelers on steroids, with a QB they didn't need, played against Rodgers without any of his weapons and a horrific defense, you think the latter would win? Lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2017 at 10:18 AM, ap0calypse said:

 

Not sure why you think H2H is the absolute truth for determining for power rankings in playoffs.  If it is, what is the point of even debating NFC power rankings?  I explained my reasoning, and while it’s true McVay didn’t adjust well to the Vikes and got owned,  I think Keenum is exposed in postseason and rank them lower because of that.  Are the Eagles worse than the Chiefs because they lost to them in week 6?

Can you point out these alleged "obvious deficiencies" that will be exploited in the playoffs by these elite coaches? This is his fifth season now so I have trouble believing that you have seen a glaring flaw in his game that all the teams in the NFL haven't seen...

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Gohawks said:

The experience vs upcoming is a tough question. Also depends on how you interpret the question. Who's the hottest or who do you see going to the super bowl? I personally view it as who is coming out of the NFC.

 

For me, it's Saints or Seattle. Goff has one more year before he can really be a threat in the playoffs as does Wentz. Similar to Wilson losing to Falcons and then rolling. Entirely different atmosphere and I simply don't see them just coming in and rolling. Keenum is a career backup and frankly I don't see him turning into a super bowl QB magically. I've stated it a few times already. Who do you take in the 4th Wilson or Keenum? It's not even close. 

 

Now, obviously people like to scream bias before they can form a rebuttal that is decent so I'll save you the trouble. My assessment of Seattle has been quite harsh and fair. Even more so than most posters here. You can read through the Seattle thread if you want proof. The reality is experience is incredibly important. Rams will lose before they rise and Vikings will never win anything with Keenum. Their defense isn't historically great to make up for their QB.

Why do you keep saying Keenum is a career backup? He's in his fifth season now and he's literally started games in every single season, albeit for an awful Houston Texans team and an awful Rams team. Do you just like to make things up to support your positions or did you genuinely not know about him and just keep speaking out of ignorance?

 

Side note: Drew Brees is a career 6-5 in the playoffs including his 3-0 gift season when the NFL decided to hand the Saints a Super Bowl and ignore the fact their defense was intentionally trying to injure players after the whistle. Not sure where you got the impression he's some kind of post season magician that can carry a team in the playoffs, probably just making stuff up to go along with your position again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SurlyRobot said:

Why do you keep saying Keenum is a career backup? He's in his fifth season now and he's literally started games in every single season, albeit for an awful Houston Texans team and an awful Rams team. Do you just like to make things up to support your positions or did you genuinely not know about him and just keep speaking out of ignorance?

 

Side note: Drew Brees is a career 6-5 in the playoffs including his 3-0 gift season when the NFL decided to hand the Saints a Super Bowl and ignore the fact their defense was intentionally trying to injure players after the whistle. Not sure where you got the impression he's some kind of post season magician that can carry a team in the playoffs, probably just making stuff up to go along with your position again.

What a silly post. Just because you start games doesn't make you not a career backup. Prior to this season he started just over 35% of his career games. Seems like a backup to me that was on terrible teams and thus had the opportunity. I think he's a great QB as a backup and have for a while but he's not winning you anything. 

 

Brees is an experienced QB and one of the best QBs to ever play the game that's been plagued by terrible defense and everything else which has prevented him from winning a super bowl. Now he has a good defense and elite run game. This is again a dumb point. He also has a ring. I couldn't care less if you want to wear a tinfoil hat it doesn't eliminate that fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no debate.

 

1.  VIKINGS - Great offense great defense.  Stellar offensive and defensive lines.  Great on 3rd downs and in the red zone.  Beating tough teams at home and on the road.  

 

2. Saints 

 

3. Rams

4. Seahawks

5. Eagles

 

6. Falcons

 

3-5 are interchangable as far as I'm concerned

 

I'm expecting a Vikings Saints rematch from week 1 in the NFC title game at USBank Stadium.  Vikings win 27-16

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TommyKramer said:

There is no debate.

 

1.  VIKINGS - Great offense great defense.  Stellar offensive and defensive lines.  Great on 3rd downs and in the red zone.  Beating tough teams at home and on the road.  

 

2. Saints 

 

3. Rams

4. Seahawks

5. Eagles

 

6. Falcons

 

3-5 are interchangable as far as I'm concerned

 

I'm expecting a Vikings Saints rematch from week 1 in the NFC title game at USBank Stadium.  Vikings win 27-16

 

Can't wait for you guys to disappoint yet again

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bgar15 said:

 

Can't wait for you guys to disappoint yet again

You have a point there, and we have you Packer fans right next door to continually rub it in.  Anyone who'd been a lifelong Vikings fan know they will find magical ways to let you down.  4 Super Bowl losses and 0 wins.  Darren Nelson not going out of bounds vs the Redskins in the NFC championship.  1998 Vikings were 15-1.  They make it to the NFC Championship game.  Gary Anderson hadn't missed a field goal all season and he misses a chip shot for the win.  Vikings take a knee at mid field with 40 seconds left and then lose in OT to the Falcons.  NFC Championship a few years later against the Giants and lose 41-0.  2009 Brett Favre led Vikings in NFC Championship.  In FG range and 12 men in the huddle knocks us backwards, then Favre throws across his body for an INT and Vikings lose.  I could go on and on, but you have to admit if you've watched them this year they do look very good and are the front runners to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl this year.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SurlyRobot said:

I thought you just said that great QBs are more important than horrible defenses? Now you're disputing the NFL's findings on Bountygate too? :rolleyes:

Arguing with someone that chooses to speak for me is pointless. Learn to comprehend at reading because it's not even entertaining to argue with someone when their entire argument is taking everything you say, interpreting it to fit their straw man, and spitting it back.

 

When did I ever say all you need is a QB to win? I said the QB position is more important than every other position combined. I didn't say the QB position alone wins Super Bowls. However, take away 1 out of 22 players and your team will go from 11-5 to 5-11.

 

Second, how am I disputing bounty gate? You make it seem like the NFL paved a way for the Saints and intentionally had them win.

 

I'll take this thread for what it is though. A Vikings fan jerk fest after not getting out of the WC for nearly 10 years. Same problem almost all other fan bases suffer from at the first sign of success. 

Edited by Gohawks
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TommyKramer said:

You have a point there, and we have you Packer fans right next door to continually rub it in.  Anyone who'd been a lifelong Vikings fan know they will find magical ways to let you down.  4 Super Bowl losses and 0 wins.  Darren Nelson not going out of bounds vs the Redskins in the NFC championship.  1998 Vikings were 15-1.  They make it to the NFC Championship game.  Gary Anderson hadn't missed a field goal all season and he misses a chip shot for the win.  Vikings take a knee at mid field with 40 seconds left and then lose in OT to the Falcons.  NFC Championship a few years later against the Giants and lose 41-0.  2009 Brett Favre led Vikings in NFC Championship.  In FG range and 12 men in the huddle knocks us backwards, then Favre throws across his body for an INT and Vikings lose.  I could go on and on, but you have to admit if you've watched them this year they do look very good and are the front runners to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl this year.  

 

You're almost making feel bad for you guys..... my apologies sir! haha

 

I'd be the first to admit how great they've looked and more impressive, how balanced. Keenum has impressive me with his pocket presence, sensing the pressure, stepping up in the pocket. Also amazing how much better these two RBs look, despite both of them looking pretty average when given the bulk of the carries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vikings are I I  the lead at the moment.  Lost to Pitt on the road, no shame in that.  The Lions loss was bad, but a weird game with Cook being injured.  

 

Beat the Rams, Lions and Falcons last 3 weeks, all potential playoff teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2017 at 11:31 AM, Gohawks said:

Vikings aren't even close to the best. You expect Keenum to lead them to the super bowl? No. I rather have Saints, Eagles, and maybe Carolina, Atlanta, and Seattle. I don't trust Keenum or Goff a damn in the playoffs until I see it. Keenum damn sure isn't winning anything.

 

Oh so you’re betting the field vs one team, Minnesota?  How bold of you. Any other hot takes?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next week this thread could/most likely will look very different, 3 big matchups and the Seahawks have a tough one as well.

 

Vikings @ Carolina (Vikings -3)

Saints @ Falcons (PK)

Eagles @ Rams (Rams -2.5)

 

Should be an interesting final quarter of the season! 

 

In my opinion, I think the Saints are the best team in the NFC.  They check every box for a team that can win in January, where for me there are question marks around every other team.  Strong running game, great playoff experienced QB and a good defense.  If they lock up homefield I think they are headed to the SB but if they have to travel to Philly I think that's where they may slip. 

 

Vikings and Eagles to me both feel the same, great teams but neither of the QB's have playoff wins/experience.  Not saying that is the only factor but in the playoffs I think that carries more weight.  If either of them had Jax D that would change my opinion because a defense like that has proven it can carry a team through the playoffs regardless of who's throwing the ball (Denver 2015, Ravens 2001, Bucs 2000). 

 

Before this week I thought the Panthers were going to make a push but I think the loss yesterday killed their chances, a loss to Min next week and I think they are the ones that would have the best chance to get ousted by GB. They play GB with Rogers in week 15 and the falcons in week 17.  If GB can get a win this week I don't think either the Falcons or Panthers make the playoffs.  In the end I think it shakes out like this:

 

Saints-  13-3

Vikings 12-4

Seahawks 12-4

Eagles 12-4

Rams 11-5

Packers 10-6

 

Falcons- 9-7

Panthers- 9-7

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Packers manage to squeak in they are going to upset one of the heavy hitters in the conference during the playoffs (my guess is the Eagles if the seeding were to line up) before disappointing themselves in a loss the following week.. it's like clockwork.

 

But ultimately I think it's a toss up between the Vikings and the Saints although logic would tend to lean towards the team with a more experienced QB and far superior run game.. Not to discredit what the Eagles have done thus far, the game against the Seahawks very well could have swung in their favor if it weren't for some rather unfortunate mishaps.. but ya know... should've, could've, would've.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2017 at 1:15 PM, jpmvg3 said:

How anyone can sit there with a straight face and say the Vikings are better than the Eagles is laughable. What will be the excuse when the Eagles slaughter the Seahawks in Seattle on Sunday? Probably something about them not having Sherman or chancellor...

Welp 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...