Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFC SOUTH

DaveThePanther2008

Recommended Posts

DaveThePanther2008 Grand Master

DaveThePanther2008

Posted
Posted

I posted this on a thread but it is an interesting topic.

 

I think this validates that the NFC South as a whole is the toughest division in football.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nfc_south

 

 

There might be a time when a team is down a year or two but we have to things no other division can say.

 

1. Only Division to have all 4 teams make the Conference Championship.

2. Only Division where each team as won the Division Championship twice.

 

(if we win it this year then that would change to 3 times each)

 

The only thing I would like to see is the records since we started playing in the NFC South.  Surprisingly Atlanta and NO have the same amount of wins.  But Atlanta has 13 more loses and 1 more tie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaCoolin Newbie

CarolinaCoolin

Posted
Posted

I mean you could argue it. But currently if you are looking at rosters I'd say it's NFC west the NFC north then NFC south then afc north then NFC east then afc east then afc south then afc west. I personally believe our rival matchups are just as good if not better than anyone else's but I'm bias and have extreme hate for the falcons so

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lovelett Newbie

lovelett

Posted
Posted

This year it is the nfc west so far. My non homer pick if it was possible for the superbowl assuming one of them switched divisions would be Seatle vs SF. That's not possible but they play in the same division so between them and the Rams stepping up makes that the strongest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

You could say that perhaps recently the division is one of the best but none of the teams has a winning record. What are their records since realignment in 2002?

NFC South

---

Atlanta Falcons: 100-75-1 (regular season), 3-6 (play offs) - 3* division titles

Carolina Panthers: 86-90 (regular season), 5-4 (play offs) - 2* division titles, 1* nfc title

New Orleans Saints: 97-79 (regular season), 5-3 (play offs) - 3* division titles, 1* nfc title, 1* super bowl

Tampa Bay Buccaneers: 81-95 (regular season), 3-2 (play offs) - 3* division titles, 1* nfc title, 1* super bowl

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveThePanther2008 Grand Master

DaveThePanther2008

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ok I did some research. Though it can be looked at many ways.  I judged it by how well the division did overall not necessary who won the conference or Super Bowl.

 

I gave 8 points for having the best season within divisions and 1 point for having the worst.  ie(when NFC W was won by a 7-9 team the were still last or 2010 NFC South had 3 teams with double digit wins so they were #1)

 

These are the totals (number of top spots)

NFC SOUTH 63  (NS) (3)

NFC EAST 61    (NE) (2)

AFC NORTH 55  (AN) (1)

NFC NORTH 52  (NN) (1)

AFC WEST 48  (AW) (2)

AFC EAST 46  (AE) (1)

AFC SOUTH 42 (AS) (1)

NFC WEST 29 (NW) (0)

 

This is the breakdown

 

2002 - 8 AW, 7 NS, 6 AE, 5 NE, 4 AN, 3 NW, 2 AS, 1 NN 

2003 - 8 NS, 7 NN, 6 NW, 5 AE, 4 AN, 3 AS, 2 NE, 1 AW

2004 - 8 AE, 7 AN, 6 AS, 5 AW, 4 NS, 3 NN, 2 NW, 1 AE

2005 - 8 NE, 7 AW, 6 NS, 5 AW, 4 NN, 3 AE, 2 NW, 1 AS

2006 - 8 AW, 7 NE, 6 NS, 5 AN, 4 NN, 3 AS, 2 AE, 1 NW

2007 - 8 AS, 7 NE, 6 NN, 5 AN, 4 NS, 3 AE, 2 NW, 1 AW

2008 - 8 NS, 7 NE, 6 AE, 5 AS, 4 NN, 3 AN, 2 AW, 1 NW

2009 - 8 NE, 7 AS, 6 NS, 5 AN, 4 NW, 3 AE, 2 AW, 1 NW

2010 - 8 NS, 7 AW, 6 AE, 5 NE, 4 NN, 3 AS, 2 AN, 1 NW

2011 - 8 AN, 7 NN, 6 AW, 5 NE, 4 NW, 3 AE, 2 NS, 1 AS

2012 - 8 NN, 7 AN, 6 NE, 5 NW, 4 NS, 3 AS, 2 AN, 1 AE

 

What surprised me was how good the NFC East has been.  Though Washington was usually on the bottom the rest of the division was pretty tough.   All those screaming NFC West.  Good lord they were always at or near the bottom perennially.  Not even close to the AFC South.

 

Its objective and you can go to the NFL.com and do your own analysis.  You may come up with something different but it won't be too far off

 

http://www.nfl.com/standings?category=div&season=2012-REG&split=Overall

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Salvo Newbie

Salvo

Posted
Posted

It's a "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately" title. NFC South has probably been the most competitive for the last decade, but the toughest division right now is the NFC West (which would have been a hilarious thought a couple years ago). The Falcons are the favorites in the South but every other team (and yes, including us) has some questions that need to be answered. The division as a whole is not there yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peppers90 NC Community Regular

Peppers90 NC

Posted
Posted

I mean you could argue it. But currently if you are looking at rosters I'd say it's NFC west the NFC north then NFC south then afc north then NFC east then afc east then afc south then afc west. I personally believe our rival matchups are just as good if not better than anyone else's but I'm bias and have extreme hate for the falcons so

i believe he is talking about the duration since the realignment, not just this year.  two years ago the nfcw was by far the worst, the nfcs has always been consistently tough.  nfcn wasnt much other than the packers for a while with an occasional good bears or vikings team

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaCoolin Newbie

CarolinaCoolin

Posted
Posted

i believe he is talking about the duration since the realignment, not just this year. two years ago the nfcw was by far the worst, the nfcs has always been consistently tough. nfcn wasnt much other than the packers for a while with an occasional good bears or vikings team

Good point. I'm still not that high on NFCe though. Maybe cause I'm around the skins all the time but I've never though that division was any good they were all just so-so and that made the matchups look better then they were

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RoaringRiot Collaborator

RoaringRiot

Posted
Posted

The NFC in general is ridiculous right now.

 

 Let's name all of the "bad" teams in the NFC:  Arizona, St Louis, and....that may be it.  Those two teams certainly aren't terrible.  The NFC East is probably the weakest, but any of those teams can beat anyone else on any given day.  

 

Now the "bad" AFC teams:  Buffalo, Jets, Miami, Tennesse, Jacksonville, Oakland, Kansas City, San Diego.  The Colts and Browns are improving but they're not that tough.  

 

The NFC is definitely a tough place to play right now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MadHatter Rookie

MadHatter

Posted
Posted

The NFC in general is ridiculous right now.

 

 Let's name all of the "bad" teams in the NFC:  Arizona, St Louis, and....that may be it.  Those two teams certainly aren't terrible.  The NFC East is probably the weakest, but any of those teams can beat anyone else on any given day.  

 

Now the "bad" AFC teams:  Buffalo, Jets, Miami, Tennesse, Jacksonville, Oakland, Kansas City, San Diego.  The Colts and Browns are improving but they're not that tough.  

 

The NFC is definitely a tough place to play right now.  

 

Exactly.

 

I think that 10 wins has you on the outside of the playoffs looking in this season.....heck. 11 win team might not make it.

 

The wildcard battle in the NFC will be incredible this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RoaringRiot Collaborator

RoaringRiot

Posted
Posted

Exactly.

I think that 10 wins has you on the outside of the playoffs looking in this season.....heck. 11 win team might not make it.

The wildcard battle in the NFC will be incredible this season.

This is the point I've tried to make to DavethePanther the whole time when he's saying we are a lock for the playoffs.

I think it's safe to assume two teams are coming from the West. 1) because they're both really good teams and 2) they have the benefit of playing the only two "bad" teams twice.

This leaves Three spots for: Carolina, NoLa, ATL, Chiago, Minnesota, and Detroit. (I don't think a NFC East team will be in a Wild Card position.

That fight for the last Wild Card is going to be nuts and it may be 11 wins. We just need to win the Division and fug it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peppers90 NC Community Regular

Peppers90 NC

Posted
Posted

The NFC in general is ridiculous right now.

 

 Let's name all of the "bad" teams in the NFC:  Arizona, St Louis, and....that may be it.  Those two teams certainly aren't terrible.  The NFC East is probably the weakest, but any of those teams can beat anyone else on any given day.  

 

Now the "bad" AFC teams:  Buffalo, Jets, Miami, Tennesse, Jacksonville, Oakland, Kansas City, San Diego.  The Colts and Browns are improving but they're not that tough.  

 

The NFC is definitely a tough place to play right now.  

and just 2 or 3 years ago it was all about the AFC, changes quick in the nfl

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveThePanther2008 Grand Master

DaveThePanther2008

Posted
  • Author
Posted

This is the point I've tried to make to DavethePanther the whole time when he's saying we are a lock for the playoffs.

I think it's safe to assume two teams are coming from the West. 1) because they're both really good teams and 2) they have the benefit of playing the only two "bad" teams twice.

This leaves Three spots for: Carolina, NoLa, ATL, Chiago, Minnesota, and Detroit. (I don't think a NFC East team will be in a Wild Card position.

That fight for the last Wild Card is going to be nuts and it may be 11 wins. We just need to win the Division and fug it

 

Show me one time I have ever said we are a lock for the playoffs. 

 

SHOW ME!!!!!!

 

Don't put words in my mouth.  I have not even posted what I think our record will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • mav1234
      PFF names Panthers QB Bryce Young the best deep passer

      By mav1234 · Posted

      Arm strength has always been overrated. But Bryce's arm was also not as bad as it looked last year - he just had terrible mechanics / footwork. He's come a LONG way. Actually, his raw arm strength isn't bad at all, as we see when he's throwing balls on the move. But prior to his benching, he didn't seem to have his mechanics down consistently enough to really drive the ball. As to eating crow, plenty of fans thought the KC game was an anomaly. With a second good game, I'm interested to see if he can make it three in a row - especially against a MUCH tougher opponent. Here's hoping!
    • CPF4LIFE
      PFF names Panthers QB Bryce Young the best deep passer

      By CPF4LIFE · Posted

      And that's not even getting to the discussion of that this kid has finally shown some sort of consistency after almost 2 years of being in the league. We dedicated an entire off season of team construction and money spent on him just so we could get to this point or you might as well say sample size of what he can actually give us after a full season of let down and the stans are already marching around wanting crow...I would do yourself a favor and put that crow on the shelf sit back and continue to observe bryces progress for now because it's not out the woodwork you wont be the one eating it. Lol
    • tukafan21
      What Are Your Top Offseason Targets Now That Bryce Young Is Showing Promise?

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      That doesn't concern me as much with how few of those big bodies WRs there are in the NFL these days, at least of the elite WRs, most of them are more fast/quick than big. It's also why I want T-Mac so bad, he'd be a unicorn in this league right now with his size and skill combo. I actually think Hunter would make for a nice pairing with Horn because of that.  Horn would be matched with the bigger/stronger WR of a team while Hunter would take on the speedier WRs. I see a lot of positives to drafting Hunter here, as a CB, but I see way too many downsides to want to take that risk with a pick we have to hit a home run with.  I'm taking T-Mac and Burden over Hunter as a WR and I'm taking Johnson over him as a CB, 100 out of 100 times. Hunter is a legitimate generational collegiate talent, but the fact is that he's not the best prospect at either of his positions in this year's draft, combine that with other issues that come with him, and I'm just going a different way if he's on the board, let someone else deal with that headache that will follow him.
×
×
  • Create New...