spkb25

that the entire nfc sucks. n some how were in a race for the payoffs. do i think we will make it no. do i hope we will yes. but only if we somehow find god, r saved from our own mistakes, and start to play well. gees i wish this would happen and am sitting here almost expecting it next week. like man we won n were now on a roll. we almost certainly will make no such come back. but damn wouldnt it be fun to watch. like all the lights come on at the same time. all of the players all of the coaches. it just all happens in an instant. then again we will loose by 20 or more this week to denver and my hopes will once again be crushed. the worst is the rest of the nfc give us nothing but chances.

mutineer10

Yeah, this is apparently what is regarded as \"parity\"

The breakdown...

Only 2 teams in the NFC can fairly be callled \"winning teams\" (Eagles 8-1, Falcons 7-2)

5 NFC teams are 5-4 (Giants, Packers, Vikings, Seahawks, Rams)

4 NFC teams are 4-5 (Bears, Lions, Cardinals, Saints)

Everybody else, except maybe the Bucs, are (by all regards) pretty much out of contention.

This is the most inexplicable phenomenon in my recent memory. The NFC was once the home of dynasties and powerhouses, but additional teams and free agency have resulted in a changing of the times. It\'s no secret who the AFC big ones are (Steelers, Patriots), but I\'ve never seen the NFC like this.

Of the NFC\'s two \"big ones,\" I can only place Philly as an \"elite\" team. Atlanta has had a tough time in many (if not most) of their games. For the season, Atlanta\'s point total is 194, their opponents are 184. I realize this is similar to Carolina\'s antics last year, but it seems to me Atlanta relies too heavily on Vick. And while I think he\'s a great talent, he\'s also a precarious thread to be hanging by (look at the Falcons without him last year).

In the 5-4 ranks, there is much dissention:

The Giants have named Eli Manning their new starter for this week, and unless your name is Marino or Roethlisberger, a rookie QB doesn\'t bode well. Marino was a legend, and Big Ben has a ton of support. Eli Manning is neither a legend, nor does he have the supporting cast of Roethlisberger. Given the state of the Giant\'s OL, this could get ugly.

The Packers have woke up, and they\'re a legitimate threat. The last gunslinger has some ammo left, and Javon Walker has really stepped up. The impending climate will help the Pack, as it always does, so they\'re a team that warrants attention.

The Vikes have really crumbled after the fall of Randy Moss (shouldn\'t have tackled Ambrose like that, you idiot). This team is marred by the same affliction that affects us every year, and I\'m sure their fans sound much like us on their respective message board.

The Seahawks and Rams look eerily like the same team, and played a close one last week to prove it. The Hawks look like they did last year: a team needing just one or two more puzzle pieces to fix it all. A troubled WR corps won\'t help the fact that they don\'t match up well with their remaining opponents. The Rams are a team on the decline, and a tough remaining schedule hurts them.

Leaves us with the 4-5\'s:

The Bears are slowly improving under Lovie Smith, but one must acknowledge doubts about the ability of Krenzel to lead them to victory. In spite of a solid defense, a tough remaining schedule hurts their chances.

The cowardly Lions are slipping, and their remaining schedule is atrocious. They may not win another game. Joey Harrington is not a premier QB, and their running game lacks talent. The defense has kept them close in a few games, but don\'t count on a miracle here.

Of the 4-5\'s, the Cards have the most favorable remaining schedule, but they\'re still the Cards. True, they beat the crap out of us, but they\'re standing on awfully shaky ground. A spotty Josh McCown, a 35-year-old relic RB in Emmitt Smith ... but a surprising and talented defense. Who knows what they\'ll do?

The Saints? Figure them out for yourselves. There\'s a lot of posts on here regarding every tedious facet of our team. Our remaining schedule really isn\'t that bad, so all is up in the air.

\"Wait and see, true believers, wait and see...\"

WhoDat

Sure the Bucs are still in it. If he Saints can go 6-1 to make the playoffs after starting 3-5, why can\'t the Bucs go 7-0 after starting 3-6? LOL

St.Shrume

Good break down, Mutineer.

Are you an ex-Bucs fan?

It is sad but true. The NFC looks a lot like the NL. Who ever wins the AFC (or AL) is the one heavily favored to win it all. I still think with all the issues and problems, the way the NFL does its salary cap and profit sharing makes it the best league in this country.

I don\'t mind parity, by definition. What I don\'t like is that instead of all the teams being close because they are all playing well. It seems that they all play badly and hence have all this parity.

The Saints/Chiefs game was a good example of that. Who is not going to lose the game? Not who is going to go out and win it.

D_it_up

Take away the 56 point thrashing the Chiefs poured on the Falcons and Atlanta\'s opponents have only scored 128 pts. Just goes to show that numbers can be very misleading.

They are more \"elite\" than they are getting credit for.

fact-o-bake

That\'s a very good breakdown mutineer.
I think that the Cardinals are the strongest team in the 4-5 ranks, and will steadily move up the ladder, right behind Green Bay. Minnesotta will catch on again, but it might be too late.
It\'s strange how there are so many teams that can\'t be figured out. The Saints are not alone in this. Consider the Cowboys, Seahawks, and Vikings. These are confusing times.

mutineer10

Thanks for the positive feedback, guys...

Nah, I\'m not an ex-Bucs fan or anything (I hate them), and I certainly wasn\'t trying to say I actually think they\'ll make the playoffs. My main point was that there are likely to be a number of NFC teams who will make the playoffs with relatively unimpressive records. I\'m sure we\'ll see a couple of 10-6 or 9-7 teams slime their way in, maybe even an 8-8. Why not us?

Nor was I knocking free-agency. I agree with Shrume that the cap and profit sharing are excellent for the league (and I\'d sure like to see it in baseball, damn yankees!). Without the cap, I can easily see someone like Dan Snyder morphing into the NFL\'s George Steinbrenner. And in our market, I fear the Saints might go the way of the Expos (unintentional Washington D.C. tie-in).

I also hope that if this L.A. thing goes through that no more \"expansion\" teams are introduced. 32\'s a nice, round number - and condusive to the talent level. Hope the NFL agrees...

I love what the cap has done for competition, but as FOB pointed out, it sure makes things confusing ... but interesting as hell.

spkb25

Take away the 56 point thrashing the Chiefs poured on the Falcons and Atlanta\'s opponents have only scored 128 pts.

d it up are you and haslett consulting. if you take away the big runs this year the saints have done well against the run. and if you take away the big pass play we have done well against the pass. take away half the points we have had scored on us and were a pretty good defense.
im just kidding but it just reminded me of that. your point was valid

mutineer10

It\'s true the Chiefs didn\'t have Priest Holmes when they played us, but Derrick Blaylock didn\'t have 4 TD\'s (his half of the Falcons thrashing), either. The remaining rosters of both teams were intact.

1 TD for Blaylock, Saints win 27-20. Interpret as you wish...

[Edited on 18/11/2004 by mutineer10]

SaintFanInATLHELL

Outstanding analysis Mutineer!

Our biggest problem is that we have lost to almost all of the teams in the pack: Minnesota, Seattle, Arizona, and another loss to an NFC team: TB. We have only beaten one (Rams).
In short it\'ll really get ugly when it comes to tiebreak time as head to head and conference record come to bear.

The funny thing is that technically Atlanta can still be caught.

SFIAH