|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Mar 18, 2020 17:44:44 GMT
Bears send a 4th round pick to the Jags for Nick Foles. With Trey Burton already there the Philly Special crew is getting the band back together.
|
|
|
Post by 尺ロㄈにモイ州凡几 on Mar 18, 2020 18:07:34 GMT
Matt Ryan had only one good year? What are you smoking, dude? Exactly, but that will be what people say to discredit the Buccaneers' success next year. No they won’t. Dude, Tom Brady has factually played in the weakest division of last decade. The three other teams in the division only made the playoffs a total of four times. None of them won more than ten games, and the best QB he faced was probably Tyrod Taylor. The only people who’d try to say the NFC south is weak are dumb cunts like Warrenpeace and DC Fan.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 18, 2020 18:47:05 GMT
Exactly, but that will be what people say to discredit the Buccaneers' success next year. No they won’t. Dude, Tom Brady has factually played in the weakest division of last decade. The three other teams in the division only made the playoffs a total of four times. None of them won more than ten games, and the best QB he faced was probably Tyrod Taylor. The only people who’d try to say the NFC south is weak are dumb cunts like Warrenpeace and DC Fan. Anytime you want to dispute my post from the previous page or the post I linked to in said post, I'm ready. Let's have a real conversation featuring genuine facts. Who was the best QB Brady faced when he was whooping up on the NFC South during his entire career? I hope you respond to this, I really do.
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Mar 18, 2020 19:01:16 GMT
Exactly, but that will be what people say to discredit the Buccaneers' success next year. No they won’t. Dude, Tom Brady has factually played in the weakest division of last decade. The three other teams in the division only made the playoffs a total of four times. None of them won more than ten games, and the best QB he faced was probably Tyrod Taylor. The only people who’d try to say the NFC south is weak are dumb cunts like Warrenpeace and DC Fan. Again, based on winning percentage, Miami, NYJ, and Buffalo were: 2019: tied for 2nd 2018: tied for last (nfc west) 2017: tied for 4th 2016: tied for 3rd 2015: 1st (as in, the best, most hardest conference) 2014: tied for 3rd 2013: 3rd 2012: tied for 5th 2011: tied for 5th 2010: tied for 2nd 2009: 4th 2008: 2nd So in the last 12 years, MiamiNJYBuffalo ranked last only once, and they were tied at that. So besides 2018, when they were tied as the worst, they were never the weakest division. In fact, they were a top 3 conference 7 out of these 12 years. I know in this day and age of misinformation, it's hard to separate fact from fiction. Please don't take this correction personally. EDIT: How about you tell me who you feel was the best conference the past 12 years. The results might surprise you...
|
|
|
Post by 尺ロㄈにモイ州凡几 on Mar 18, 2020 19:25:47 GMT
No they won’t. Dude, Tom Brady has factually played in the weakest division of last decade. The three other teams in the division only made the playoffs a total of four times. None of them won more than ten games, and the best QB he faced was probably Tyrod Taylor. The only people who’d try to say the NFC south is weak are dumb cunts like Warrenpeace and DC Fan. Anytime you want to dispute my post from the previous page or the post I linked to in said post, I'm ready. Let's have a real conversation featuring genuine facts. Who was the best QB Brady faced when he was whooping up on the NFC South during his entire career? I hope you respond to this, I really do. Well, speaking as someone who is unbiased, the Patriots did play in the weakest division in NFL for the last decade and it benefited them greatly. Yeah, it helped that they were focused, and prepared, and had "the greatest QB of all time", but to say playing in a weak division didn't have any part in their dominance over that division is laughable. The other AFC East teams were largely garbage or just ok. Only six times did a team in the east win more than eight games. Only four times did an east team get to the playoffs. If any of the other AFC East teams were able to consistently trot out a quality team, then I doubt the Patriots would've won the division as many times as they did. I'm really not trying to discredit the Patriots success any. I'm just saying that they were aided by playing in a division that was terrible for pretty much the entire decade.
|
|
|
Post by 尺ロㄈにモイ州凡几 on Mar 18, 2020 19:37:09 GMT
No they won’t. Dude, Tom Brady has factually played in the weakest division of last decade. The three other teams in the division only made the playoffs a total of four times. None of them won more than ten games, and the best QB he faced was probably Tyrod Taylor. The only people who’d try to say the NFC south is weak are dumb cunts like Warrenpeace and DC Fan. Again, based on winning percentage, Miami, NYJ, and Buffalo were: 2019: tied for 2nd 2018: tied for last (nfc west) 2017: tied for 4th 2016: tied for 3rd 2015: 1st (as in, the best, most hardest conference) 2014: tied for 3rd 2013: 3rd 2012: tied for 5th 2011: tied for 5th 2010: tied for 2nd 2009: 4th 2008: 2nd So in the last 12 years, MiamiNJYBuffalo ranked last only once, and they were tied at that. So besides 2018, when they were tied as the worst, they were never the weakest division. In fact, they were a top 3 conference 7 out of these 12 years. I know in this day and age of misinformation, it's hard to separate fact from fiction. Please don't take this correction personally. EDIT: How about you tell me who you feel was the best conference the past 12 years. The results might surprise you... I'm confused. Are you talking conference or division? Are those stats in comparison to the AFC or to the entire NFL? Also where'd you find those stats? I'd very much like to take a look at them. I seriously doubt that the AFC East teams (outside of the Patriots) were ranked that high based on winning percentage over the last decade when compared to the entire NFL. Especially compared to divisions like the NFC West, NFC South, AFC North, and NFC North.
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Mar 18, 2020 19:48:24 GMT
Again, based on winning percentage, Miami, NYJ, and Buffalo were: 2019: tied for 2nd 2018: tied for last (nfc west) 2017: tied for 4th 2016: tied for 3rd 2015: 1st (as in, the best, most hardest conference) 2014: tied for 3rd 2013: 3rd 2012: tied for 5th 2011: tied for 5th 2010: tied for 2nd 2009: 4th 2008: 2nd So in the last 12 years, MiamiNJYBuffalo ranked last only once, and they were tied at that. So besides 2018, when they were tied as the worst, they were never the weakest division. In fact, they were a top 3 conference 7 out of these 12 years. I know in this day and age of misinformation, it's hard to separate fact from fiction. Please don't take this correction personally. EDIT: How about you tell me who you feel was the best conference the past 12 years. The results might surprise you... I'm confused. Are you talking conference or division? Are those stats in comparison to the AFC or to the entire NFL? Also where'd you find those stats? I'd very much like to take a look at them. I seriously doubt that the AFC East teams (outside of the Patriots) were ranked that high based on winning percentage over the last decade when compared to the entire NFL. Especially compared to divisions like the NFC West, NFC South, AFC North, and NFC North. Sorry, my mistake. I mean division. If it says 2nd, it means they had the second best winning percentage of the 8 divisions. Mind you, that is comparing them to all of the other bottom 3 teams in each divison. My stats were found by going to the standings each year and comparing the combined winning percentage of MiamiNJYBuffalo to the combined winning percentage of the 3 teams in every division that did not win their division. Please, double check. It is refreshing to have someone willing to check the numbers to continue the conversation.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Mar 18, 2020 19:53:46 GMT
Anytime you want to dispute my post from the previous page or the post I linked to in said post, I'm ready. Let's have a real conversation featuring genuine facts. Who was the best QB Brady faced when he was whooping up on the NFC South during his entire career? I hope you respond to this, I really do. Well, speaking as someone who is unbiased, the Patriots did play in the weakest division in NFL for the last decade and it benefited them greatly. Yeah, it helped that they were focused, and prepared, and had "the greatest QB of all time", but to say playing in a weak division didn't have any part in their dominance over that division is laughable. The other AFC East teams were largely garbage or just ok. Only six times did a team in the east win more than eight games. Only four times did an east team get to the playoffs. If any of the other AFC East teams were able to consistently trot out a quality team, then I doubt the Patriots would've won the division as many times as they did. I'm really not trying to discredit the Patriots success any. I'm just saying that they were aided by playing in a division that was terrible for pretty much the entire decade. That's all anybody has said. But these Patriot groupies can't accept any criticism of "the greatest team ever".
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 18, 2020 19:58:15 GMT
Anytime you want to dispute my post from the previous page or the post I linked to in said post, I'm ready. Let's have a real conversation featuring genuine facts. Who was the best QB Brady faced when he was whooping up on the NFC South during his entire career? I hope you respond to this, I really do. Well, speaking as someone who is unbiased, the Patriots did play in the weakest division in NFL for the last decade and it benefited them greatly. Yeah, it helped that they were focused, and prepared, and had "the greatest QB of all time", but to say playing in a weak division didn't have any part in their dominance over that division is laughable. The other AFC East teams were largely garbage or just ok. Only six times did a team in the east win more than eight games. Only four times did an east team get to the playoffs. If any of the other AFC East teams were able to consistently trot out a quality team, then I doubt the Patriots would've won the division as many times as they did. I'm really not trying to discredit the Patriots success any. I'm just saying that they were aided by playing in a division that was terrible for pretty much the entire decade. This is from the link I provided to a previous post of mine that you clearly didn't read: Can you explain that to me? Can you explain how playing in a weak division helped them when there were so many seasons where literally half of their losses were to division foes? Can you explain this? Can you explain it? Because I can. It turns out Brady's Patriots beat whoever is in front of them, much more often than not.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 18, 2020 20:00:25 GMT
Well, speaking as someone who is unbiased, the Patriots did play in the weakest division in NFL for the last decade and it benefited them greatly. Yeah, it helped that they were focused, and prepared, and had "the greatest QB of all time", but to say playing in a weak division didn't have any part in their dominance over that division is laughable. The other AFC East teams were largely garbage or just ok. Only six times did a team in the east win more than eight games. Only four times did an east team get to the playoffs. If any of the other AFC East teams were able to consistently trot out a quality team, then I doubt the Patriots would've won the division as many times as they did. I'm really not trying to discredit the Patriots success any. I'm just saying that they were aided by playing in a division that was terrible for pretty much the entire decade. That's all anybody has said. But these Patriot groupies can't accept any criticism of "the greatest team ever". And it's wrong, and I've proven it's wrong over and over again. But idiot 'fans' who want to sue the NFL when their team loses, who offer unsubstantiated opinions without factual data to back it up, can't accept reality.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 18, 2020 20:05:27 GMT
Anytime you want to dispute my post from the previous page or the post I linked to in said post, I'm ready. Let's have a real conversation featuring genuine facts. Who was the best QB Brady faced when he was whooping up on the NFC South during his entire career? I hope you respond to this, I really do. Well, speaking as someone who is unbiased, the Patriots did play in the weakest division in NFL for the last decade and it benefited them greatly. Yeah, it helped that they were focused, and prepared, and had "the greatest QB of all time", but to say playing in a weak division didn't have any part in their dominance over that division is laughable. The other AFC East teams were largely garbage or just ok. Only six times did a team in the east win more than eight games. Only four times did an east team get to the playoffs. If any of the other AFC East teams were able to consistently trot out a quality team, then I doubt the Patriots would've won the division as many times as they did. I'm really not trying to discredit the Patriots success any. I'm just saying that they were aided by playing in a division that was terrible for pretty much the entire decade. And the Jets went to the AFC Championship twice in a row, while the Patriots kept on posting winning seasons. The NFC South takes turns having 6-10 seasons while the bum of the month makes a Super Bowl (and loses to the Patriots) every ten years and immediately sinks back into mediocrity. I posted the Patriots record vs. the NFC South in a previous post. That says it all. There's no way around it, which is why you chose not to address it. Look at those numbers along with their overall winning percentage in and out of the division since 2003. Case closed.
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Mar 18, 2020 20:13:54 GMT
NFC West non-division winners' winning percentage compared to the other 7 divisions.
2019: 1st 2018: tied for last (AFC East) 2017: last 2016: tied for 3rd 2015: tied for 4th 2014: 2nd 2013: 1st 2012: tied for 3rd 2011: 7th 2010: last 2009: last 2008: last
So the NFC West finished as a top 3 division 5 times. They finished last or tied for last 5 times.
Statistically speaking, they were the much easier division for the division winner over the last 12 years.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 18, 2020 20:19:56 GMT
NFC West non-division winners' winning percentage compared to three other 7 divisions. 2019: 1st 2018: tied for last (AFC East) 2017: last 2016: tied for 3rd 2015: tied for 4th 2014: 2nd 2013: 1st 2012: tied for 3rd 2011: 7th 2010: last 2009: last 2008: last So the NFC West finished as a top 3 division 5 times. They finished last or tied for last 5 times. Statistically speaking, they were the much easier division for the division winner over the last 12 years. This evidence is irrefutable. He's going to do what he always does: make a few bonehead posts, and when he comes up against someone who actually knows what they're talking about, claim he was just trolling the whole time and the joke is on you. Nobody is pissed off, nobody was tricked. I enjoy presenting a case like this because I know the facts are on my side. And I'm not going to be able to have positive conversations about the Patriots for some time to come, so I better make the most of it now.
|
|
|
Post by 尺ロㄈにモイ州凡几 on Mar 18, 2020 20:29:19 GMT
Well, speaking as someone who is unbiased, the Patriots did play in the weakest division in NFL for the last decade and it benefited them greatly. Yeah, it helped that they were focused, and prepared, and had "the greatest QB of all time", but to say playing in a weak division didn't have any part in their dominance over that division is laughable. The other AFC East teams were largely garbage or just ok. Only six times did a team in the east win more than eight games. Only four times did an east team get to the playoffs. If any of the other AFC East teams were able to consistently trot out a quality team, then I doubt the Patriots would've won the division as many times as they did. I'm really not trying to discredit the Patriots success any. I'm just saying that they were aided by playing in a division that was terrible for pretty much the entire decade. This is from the link I provided to a previous post of mine that you clearly didn't read: Can you explain that to me? Can you explain how playing in a weak division helped them when there were so many seasons where literally half of their losses were to division foes? Can you explain this? Can you explain it? Because I can. It turns out Brady's Patriots beat whoever is in front of them, much more often than not. Well, first off: I'm not talking about last decade. I'm talking about only 2010-2019. Secondly: Yes, the Patriots win against everyone, but the other AFC East teams don't. There's a consistency in how subpar or terrible those other teams are. It's a lot easier to win a division when the other teams in your division aren't giving you much competition for the title. Thirdly: Can you explain why you get so bent out of shape whenever someone says something negative about the Patriots or won't give them full credit for their success? Can you explain that? Can you? I need to know. I have to know.
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Mar 18, 2020 20:36:33 GMT
This is from the link I provided to a previous post of mine that you clearly didn't read: Can you explain that to me? Can you explain how playing in a weak division helped them when there were so many seasons where literally half of their losses were to division foes? Can you explain this? Can you explain it? Because I can. It turns out Brady's Patriots beat whoever is in front of them, much more often than not. Well, first off: I'm not talking about last decade. I'm talking about only 2010-2019. Secondly: Yes, the Patriots win against everyone, but the other AFC East teams don't. There's a consistency in how subpar or terrible those other teams are. It's a lot easier to win a division when the other teams in your division aren't giving you much competition for the title. Thirdly: Can you explain why you get so bent out of shape whenever someone says something negative about the Patriots or won't give them full credit for their success? Can you explain that? Can you? I need to know. I have to know. Well, according to the information I have provided, at the very least the AFC East has been tougher to win over the past 12 years than the NFC West. Would you like me to give you the information on another division? Pick one, any one, and we'll see what the numbers say.
|
|
|
Post by 尺ロㄈにモイ州凡几 on Mar 18, 2020 20:58:27 GMT
Well, speaking as someone who is unbiased, the Patriots did play in the weakest division in NFL for the last decade and it benefited them greatly. Yeah, it helped that they were focused, and prepared, and had "the greatest QB of all time", but to say playing in a weak division didn't have any part in their dominance over that division is laughable. The other AFC East teams were largely garbage or just ok. Only six times did a team in the east win more than eight games. Only four times did an east team get to the playoffs. If any of the other AFC East teams were able to consistently trot out a quality team, then I doubt the Patriots would've won the division as many times as they did. I'm really not trying to discredit the Patriots success any. I'm just saying that they were aided by playing in a division that was terrible for pretty much the entire decade. And the Jets went to the AFC Championship twice in a row, while the Patriots kept on posting winning seasons. The NFC South takes turns having 6-10 seasons while the bum of the month makes a Super Bowl (and loses to the Patriots) every ten years and immediately sinks back into mediocrity. I posted the Patriots record vs. the NFC South in a previous post. That says it all. There's no way around it, which is why you chose not to address it. Look at those numbers along with their overall winning percentage in and out of the division since 2003. Case closed. Case isn't closed though, my dude. All you managed to do was continue to address the points I was already agreeing with you about. Yes, the Patriots have lost to the teams in their division, yes, the Patriots have a great record against pretty much every other team in the NFL, yes yes yes, it's all true. You're a genius Boston sports fan and we all should bow to how superior you are to the rest of us. Because you've spent decades defending your Pats, you're some kind of master at making arguments for why the Patriots are the greatest dynasty and why Tom Brady is the greatest QB in NFL history. BUT what in the holy fuck was the other AFC east teams' records against the other teams in the NFL? Not very good, right? Not being able to beat teams outside of ones division does tend to prevent a team from having much success and getting to the post season. You can have a team have a good record against another team in their division, but have a pretty lousy overall record against other teams outside their division. In case you don't remember, the other teams in the AFC East don't only play teams in their division.
|
|
|
Post by 尺ロㄈにモイ州凡几 on Mar 18, 2020 21:00:33 GMT
Well, first off: I'm not talking about last decade. I'm talking about only 2010-2019. Secondly: Yes, the Patriots win against everyone, but the other AFC East teams don't. There's a consistency in how subpar or terrible those other teams are. It's a lot easier to win a division when the other teams in your division aren't giving you much competition for the title. Thirdly: Can you explain why you get so bent out of shape whenever someone says something negative about the Patriots or won't give them full credit for their success? Can you explain that? Can you? I need to know. I have to know. Well, according to the information I have provided, at the very least the AFC East has been tougher to win over the past 12 years than the NFC West. Would you like me to give you the information on another division? Pick one, any one, and we'll see what the numbers say. Let's do AFC North and NFC South
|
|
|
Post by marsexplorer on Mar 18, 2020 21:09:50 GMT
Trae Waynes going to the Bengals is a huge loss for the Vikings. Really, really huge. Despite what the talking heads here want you to believe. They keep talking about how he was okay but never great. Yeah well cornerback is a hard ass position to play and he played hard. He always gave 100%. And he was good far more than not. This is a legit loss and one that we'll feel every week. I can't imagine what Rick Spielman's strategy is. I understand releasing Xavier Rhodes, he went from a top CB to a less than average one in two seasons. But now letting Waynes go? I have never been a big Trae Waynes fan, but letting him go means they are minus both starting CB's from last season's team. I think Holtan Hill had a excellent season and deserve a starting spot, but other than that the Vikings are CB poor. Talk is they are going to put the Franchise tag on on Anthony Harris. What? Tag a Safety who is mediocre at best? With the Diggs trade they also now need another good receiver in order to help free up Thielen. That receiver is not on the present roster so that means another trade? The Draft? Not a good situation. I am at my wit's end with this team, but have been a fan far to long to give up on them. I guess that means more years of frustration.
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Mar 18, 2020 21:26:27 GMT
Trae Waynes going to the Bengals is a huge loss for the Vikings. Really, really huge. Despite what the talking heads here want you to believe. They keep talking about how he was okay but never great. Yeah well cornerback is a hard ass position to play and he played hard. He always gave 100%. And he was good far more than not. This is a legit loss and one that we'll feel every week. I can't imagine what Rick Spielman's strategy is. I understand releasing Xavier Rhodes, he went from a top CB to a less than average one in two seasons. But now letting Waynes go? I have never been a big Trae Waynes fan, but letting him go means they are minus both starting CB's from last season's team. I think Holtan Hill had a excellent season and deserve a starting spot, but other than that the Vikings are CB poor. Talk is they are going to put the Franchise tag on on Anthony Harris. What? Tag a Safety who is mediocre at best? With the Diggs trade they also now need another good receiver in order to help free up Thielen. That receiver is not on the present roster so that means another trade? The Draft? Not a good situation. I am at my wit's end with this team, but have been a fan far to long to give up on them. I guess that means more years of frustration. I have a feeling they want Bisi to be the number 2. That's not going to scare anybody. Thielen will be doubled all season and Kirk will just checkdown or throw a screen to Cook for short or nothing. I agree. This is going to be a long season.
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Mar 18, 2020 21:55:03 GMT
Well, according to the information I have provided, at the very least the AFC East has been tougher to win over the past 12 years than the NFC West. Would you like me to give you the information on another division? Pick one, any one, and we'll see what the numbers say. Let's do AFC North and NFC South AFC North/NFC South ranking (out of 8) 2019: 7 / T5 2018: T1 / 6 2017: 8 / 1 2016: 5 / T3 2015: 6 / 5 2014: 1 / 7 2013: 4 / 6 2012: 2 / T4 2011: 1 / T5 2010: T5 / 1 2009: T2 / T5 2008: 5 / 1 So the AFC North had a top 3 division 5 times, and finished last or tied for last 1 time So the NFC South had a top 3 division 4 times and finished last or tied for last 0 times. And as a reminder, the AFC East, the "weakest division," had a top 3 division *6 times and finished last or tied for last 1 time. *not 7 like previously stated, found an error in 2009, they were 4th, not 3rd So according to the numbers, the AFC East had the better teams more often over the last 12 years than the NFC West, NFC South, and AFC North.
|
|