Who Wins A Playoff Game First?

[Brownshoe]

(08-18-2015, 10:08 AM)djs7685 Wrote: There's a lot going on here. So let's start from Brownshoe's flawed logic. I couldn't care less about multiple Super Bowls since what the Steelers did 7 years ago has ZERO bearing on how good they are in 2015. Hell, even the Ravens have a vastly different team today than what they won the 2012 SB with. If anything, the multiple SBs hurts your argument because the Seahawks have been there twice in as many years with relatively the same exact team that they're taking into 2015. So, let's just throw out past Super Bowls in general becuase they have nothing to do with 2015, nor does the "more playoff teams than anyone else" over your cherry picked X amount of years that you didn't even mention. You just said "in recent years", uhh...okay? What does that have to do with right now? 2 years ago we only had 1 playoff team and the rest of the division didn't look so great. Last year we beat up the 2 weakest divisions in the entire NFL, if we didn't send 3 teams to the playoffs I'd be concerned. Isn't that more recent to talk about than SB wins 3 and 7 years ago?

So, let's just go with talking about 2014 and 2015, since we can use what happened in 2014 and then this offseason to project a bit.

If you're into DVOA and such, feel free to check out this chart... http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff

Strength of Schedule 2014 (not using 2013 stats, but the actual 2014 statistics)
SEA - 13
SF - 8
ARI - 2

STL - 9

PIT - 29
BAL - 30
CIN - 15
CLE - 25

Every single team in the NFCW had a tougher schedule than any AFCN team in 2014. No wonder we sent 3 teams to the playoffs, not everybody gets to beat up on the historically terrible NFCS and the garbage can AFCS. Saying we're automatically better because we sent more teams to the playoffs is absolutely flawed.

I feel like you guys (and most others here) follow closely to what the Bengals do and not many other teams. Sometimes people seem to follow our division, but not much else past that, IF that.

We could get into more in depth if you'd like, but I promise that the Rams and Cardinals lost less and gained more this past offseason than either of the Ravens or Steelers. Just have an open mind and actually look at the players and coaches lost/gained on those 4 teams and then we can talk some more.

I do think the AFCN is good, but we got to beat up some awfully shitty teams last year, and the year before that the Bengals were the only team that looked good and went to the playoffs. There's nothing in recent memory that makes me believe we're in a "tougher" division than the NFCW unless we want to go back 3-4 years which has very little to do with the present. The Rams have probably had the best offseason out of any team in either division, the Bengals and Cardinals both remained about the same while sprinkling in small moves, the 49ers had a BAD offseason, the Browns are still going to be the Browns (no QB, questionable and poor coaching), and the Steelers lost quite a haul on defense and the Ravens have some question marks in key places (though I believe they'll be fine). The Seahawks are easily the best team in either division right now. I don't know how anybody can say that the AFCN is absolutely better than the NFCW without question. It's definitely homeristic.

The Cardinals lost their best defensive player, and they lost their DC. Who did they pick up? Gresham? LOL. Carson Palmer is coming off a bad injury last year, and their receiving core is getting weaker. Fitzgerald has been losing a step the last few years, they don't have that great of a run game, and their offensive line isn't good at all. With the loss of Todd Bowles, and Darnell Dockett they Cardinals defense will be a lot worse than what they were last year.

The Rams have got better from last year, but really it's not hard to improve off of a 6-10 record. They upgraded their QB, and they drafted a rookie RB that is coming off of a major injury. The Rams don't have any legit receiver on the team, and they have a HORRIBLE OL. Their defense is getting a little better, but they didn't have that great of a defense last year.

The 49ers are a train wreck. The Browns probably have a better team than them this year. Pretty much all their starters on defense retired or left. They lost their HC who BTW is the biggest reason why they even stopped sucking in the first place. They lost their #1 receiver, and Kaepernick isn't a very good QB anyways.

The Seahawks is losing depth in their secondary, but still have one of the best. They will have an even worse OL this year, and will probably be the worst OL in the league next year. Them losing their OL will affect their whole offense, because their offense is based around the run game. Jimmy Graham will help their passing game, but it's not even going to be close to make up the difference in losing a few key pieces in their OL. Lynch is a beast, and will probably still be very good next year. You just have to remember that he's getting up there in age, and he's not going to have any help with his OL this year.

The Steelers are going to have one of the best offenses in the game. Big Ben is an elite QB, Brown is an elite WR, and Bell is an elite RB. The Steelers OL has improved a lot over the last few years. In fact they have a good OL now. The Steelers also have a good TE, and #2 receiver. The biggest downfall with the Steelers is their defense. They will have one of the worst defenses in the league. The Steelers will still be a very good team just because they will have an insane offense.

The Ravens are going to be a good team next year too. They have a great OL, and they have a good RB. They have a solid WR in Smith sr, and Breshad Perriman has the ability to have a big impact on their team. They also have a good TE in Pitta. Their defense ranked in the top 10 last year, and they probably will again next season. Ngata was a big blow to their defense, but getting Jimmy Smith back from injury will help their secondary (what was lacking last year). They still have beasts on their team like Suggs, and Dumervil.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/08/nfl-most-wins-per-division-afc-north-nfc-east-best-divisions-in-football-most-playoff-appearances

That shows the past 10 years the AFC north has been the best division. If you want to cut it down to the last 5 years then the AFCN still has had 11 playoff teams (the most out of any division), and two teams that went to the SB (one of which won one).

[djs7685]

(08-18-2015, 10:59 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/08/nfl-most-wins-per-division-afc-north-nfc-east-best-divisions-in-football-most-playoff-appearances

That shows the past 10 years the AFC north has been the best division. If you want to cut it down to the last 5 years then the AFCN still has had 11 playoff teams (the most out of any division), and two teams that went to the SB (one of which won one).

No, I want to cut it down to right now, which is all that matters when you're talking about how strong a division is. Nothing that happened 5 years ago matters one bit when it comes to which division is stronger.

Your entire post just reeks of bias. You brush off things for the AFCN teams that you consider big blows to the NFCW teams.

It's funny that in the Andy discussions earlier this year, you were claiming how great of weapons Russell Wilson, Kaepernick, and Palmer had, but now they're all piles of shit because it doesn't fit your argument.

Clearly you aren't interested in objective debate, so good day to you.

[Luvnit2]

(08-18-2015, 10:59 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: The Cardinals lost their best defensive player, and they lost their DC. Who did they pick up? Gresham? LOL. Carson Palmer is coming off a bad injury last year, and their receiving core is getting weaker. Fitzgerald has been losing a step the last few years, they don't have that great of a run game, and their offensive line isn't good at all. With the loss of Todd Bowles, and Darnell Dockett they Cardinals defense will be a lot worse than what they were last year.

The Rams have got better from last year, but really it's not hard to improve off of a 6-10 record. They upgraded their QB, and they drafted a rookie RB that is coming off of a major injury. The Rams don't have any legit receiver on the team, and they have a HORRIBLE OL. Their defense is getting a little better, but they didn't have that great of a defense last year.

The 49ers are a train wreck. The Browns probably have a better team than them this year. Pretty much all their starters on defense retired or left. They lost their HC who BTW is the biggest reason why they even stopped sucking in the first place. They lost their #1 receiver, and Kaepernick isn't a very good QB anyways.

The Seahawks is losing depth in their secondary, but still have one of the best. They will have an even worse OL this year, and will probably be the worst OL in the league next year. Them losing their OL will affect their whole offense, because their offense is based around the run game. Jimmy Graham will help their passing game, but it's not even going to be close to make up the difference in losing a few key pieces in their OL. Lynch is a beast, and will probably still be very good next year. You just have to remember that he's getting up there in age, and he's not going to have any help with his OL this year.

The Steelers are going to have one of the best offenses in the game. Big Ben is an elite QB, Brown is an elite WR, and Bell is an elite RB. The Steelers OL has improved a lot over the last few years. In fact they have a good OL now. The Steelers also have a good TE, and #2 receiver. The biggest downfall with the Steelers is their defense. They will have one of the worst defenses in the league. The Steelers will still be a very good team just because they will have an insane offense.

The Ravens are going to be a good team next year too. They have a great OL, and they have a good RB. They have a solid WR in Smith sr, and Breshad Perriman has the ability to have a big impact on their team. They also have a good TE in Pitta. Their defense ranked in the top 10 last year, and they probably will again next season. Ngata was a big blow to their defense, but getting Jimmy Smith back from injury will help their secondary (what was lacking last year). They still have beasts on their team like Suggs, and Dumervil.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/08/nfl-most-wins-per-division-afc-north-nfc-east-best-divisions-in-football-most-playoff-appearances

That shows the past 10 years the AFC north has been the best division. If you want to cut it down to the last 5 years then the AFCN still has had 11 playoff teams (the most out of any division), and two teams that went to the SB (one of which won one).

I would point out Pitta is likely to never play a down in the NFL. So, the Ravens who lost Daniels also, have to rely on a rookie TE and a rookie WR who is very talented ala Greg Little, but also has had major drop issues.

The Steelers offense is one of the best in the NFL, their issues will be on defense. If they can improve the defense, they could be a top 3 team in my opinion, if not, they could not make the playoffs.

[Brownshoe]

(08-18-2015, 11:05 AM)djs7685 Wrote: No, I want to cut it down to right now, which is all that matters when you're talking about how strong a division is. Nothing that happened 5 years ago matters one bit when it comes to which division is stronger.

Your entire post just reeks of bias. You brush off things for the AFCN teams that you consider big blows to the NFCW teams.

It's funny that in the Andy discussions earlier this year, you were claiming how great of weapons Russell Wilson, Kaepernick, and Palmer had, but now they're all piles of shit because it doesn't fit your argument.

Clearly you aren't interested in objective debate, so good day to you.

Yeah, because Wilson didn't lose Golden Tate, or his OL what makes his offense work. Kaepernick didn't lose his RB, and #1 receiver along with his great defense, and when have I ever said anything about Palmer? Not to mention I never said that Wilson doesn't have decent weapons this year.

I guess it's good for you to tap out when you have nothing to say.

[djs7685]

(08-18-2015, 11:31 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Yeah, because Wilson didn't lose Golden Tate, or his OL what makes his offense work. Kaepernick didn't lose his RB, and #1 receiver, and when have I ever said anything about Palmer?

I guess it's good for you to tap out when you have nothing to say.

"Yeah, because *insert condescending statement*"

Not "tapping out", just choosing to not argue with a known biased poster. Thanks, but no thanks.

[Brownshoe]

(08-18-2015, 11:33 AM)djs7685 Wrote: "Yeah, because *insert condescending statement*"

Not "tapping out", just choosing to not argue with a known biased poster. Thanks, but no thanks.

You're not arguing because you have nothing to say.

Bye

[djs7685]

(08-18-2015, 11:35 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: You're not arguing because you have nothing to say.

Bye

The Cardinals added Woodley, Redding, Peters, Weatherspoon, and Dennard...and that's just their defense. That's not even to mention draft picks like Golden who should contribute immediately. That poor OL you mentioned was bolstered by Mike Iupati and D.J. Humphries. Their receiving corp and running backs may not be flashy, but don't forget this is a playoff team that was led by Drew Stanton for half the year. Oh, and by the way, Carson Palmer > Andy Dalton.

The Rams added a solid QB, the best RB prospect in the draft, along with a handful of OL help as well. They have solid TEs that have actually put it on the field in the NFL unlike everyone in the entire AFCN not named Heath Miller. They snagged Akeem Ayers and Nick Fairley to add to their great front 7. Mark Barron should be better this year than he played in 2014, but they did just lose one of their potential starters at CB for the year which may hurt them. The Rams didn't really lose much at all, they just improved in most of their negative areas.

The 49ers are in for a rough year, I'm not going to try and justify anything there because I don't think much needs to be said about them.

The Seahawks are likely the best team in the NFL right now, I don't feel I need to justify anything for them either.

You bring up guys like Pitta that won't even play this year, and you also ignore losses like McPhee and Torrey Smith. Personally, I think the Ravens will be fine, but we can't pretend their losses didn't happen without them gaining much overall this offseason. Ngata is a phenomenal player, but they do have guys on the roster to rotate in and do work on the line.

The Bengals had a terribly ranked defense last year, and will likely be without Burfict yet again. MJ, Sims, and Hawk are reasonable additions, but Zimmer is still gone and you didn't seem think Ayers and Fairley were a big deal for the Rams, and the Bengals additions are likely an equivalent to theirs. The Bengals offense should be better this season, Eifert and MLJ are going to be nice to have back.

The Browns still don't have a QB and their coaching is still a huge question mark. You can't completely write off the 49ers and act like the Browns are going to automatically be better than them. Kaepernick is still a playmaker though he's not a great QB. They'll win some games even though you have said in other threads that they may not even win 1 game. They will.

You ignore the impact that losing a Hall of Fame coordinator (LeBeau) will have while mentioning the Cardinals DC as this gigantic loss that they won't be able to overcome. Bowles was their DC for what? 1 or 2 years? The Steelers are losing a guy that is the consensus best DC of the past decade. They also lost Keisel, Taylor, Polamalu, and Worilds among others. That defense is going to be pretty rough. Sure, they'll have a great offense, and I find it completely laughable that you claim they'll still be considered a "very good team" even if their defense is as awful as it looks on paper. Offense alone doesn't win you games. The Steelers defense, right now, looks like it's going to be MUCH worse than any of the high-powered offense based teams in recent memory. They couldn't rush the passer this year and have only lost guys on that side of the ball. They reached for a LB this year so I can't see that being a huge impact move. The only thing I can say positive about that defense is that Mike Mitchell SHOULD be better this season than he has been recently.

Again, keep pretending the AFCN is improving and completely ignore everything the NFCW has done positively. It fits you a lot better when you only look at one side of things, so you should probably stop being a douche to me or else I'll keep making you look like a fool by posting the reality of the situation and not your twisted, spin sessions.

[*Nately120*]

If Brownshoe wants to believe the Packers and Seahawks are inferior to the Steelers and the Ravens then let him. For some reason he has to live in a world where Andy Dalton constantly faces more difficulties and hard luck than Charlie Brown, the Jews, and Job combined.

Yes, the Bengals would LOVE to only have to go through one of the two teams that played in the NFC Championship game to win the division. Talk about a cake-walk!

I also want to point out that never once did I say the Cardinals/Packers had to compete with the Rams/Bears. I stated that both of these teams are in divisions where the winner has been exceedingly dominant in the division and against the entire NFL for the majority of the past 4 years. The Browns, Rams, and the 49ers (now) don't enter into this.

The last time the Bengals won the "best division in football" (and the only time under your beloved's watch) they were the only team in the division with a winning record, so let's not get too smug.

[djs7685]

(08-18-2015, 12:22 PM)Nately120 Wrote: For some reason he has to live in a world where Andy Dalton constantly faces more difficulties and hard luck than Charlie Brown, the Jews, and Job combined.

That's the entire difficulty of any discussion with him.

Whether it completely contradicts another post of his from 3 months ago or not, he will say whatever makes Andy look better. He's not a Bengals fan, he's an Andy Dalton fan first and foremost. The infatuation is gross.

[*Nately120*]

(08-18-2015, 12:26 PM)djs7685 Wrote: That's the entire difficulty of any discussion with him.

Whether it completely contradicts another post of his from 3 months ago or not, he will say whatever makes Andy look better. He's not a Bengals fan, he's an Andy Dalton fan first and foremost. The infatuation is gross.

I don't mind fandom and bias but the guy needs to realize he is moving mountains to puff up the awesomeness of the Steelers and Ravens in order to turn Dalton into a martyr.  Extolling the virtues of the Ravens and Steelers in these parts?  Ouch.

[djs7685]

(08-18-2015, 12:33 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I don't mind fandom and bias but the guy needs to realize he is moving mountains to puff up the awesomeness of the Steelers and Ravens in order to turn Dalton into a martyr.  Extolling the virtues of the Ravens and Steelers in these parts?  Ouch.

I think bias is okay to an extent, but it's literally every conversation with the guy. You can talk about something completely unrelated to football and his opinion would be directly related to a way to make it seem like Andy Dalton is a great quarterback. So gross.

I actually appreciate when people are realistic about the positives of our division rivals, that's lacking around here, but he's doing it for 1 single reason and he's not being objective about it at all.

The Cardinals are doomed because their DC for the last year or two is gone, but the Steelers will be fine losing their Hall of Fame DC that's been considered one of the greatest of all time, their All-Pro safety (though he's been declining), their sack leader (on a team that can't get to the QB), and their #1 CB (on a team with a weak secondary).

The Steelers will have a great offense and the Ravens will be a good team even though they lost some pieces, but ignoring all of the facts to nitpick the NFCW though those teams barely lost any players (outside of SF)? Seems like an odd way to go about looking objective to me. The Rams and Cardinals absolutely had positive offseasons, the Seahawks are likely the best team in football, and the 49ers had a rough one. The Steelers had a negative offseason, Bengals and Ravens both range from question marks to positive, and the Browns are definitely still the Browns. How does that equate to the AFCN being automatically superior? I guess if you just go by Super Bowl wins 7 years ago then we win? YAY!

[Brownshoe]

(08-18-2015, 12:04 PM)djs7685 Wrote: The Cardinals added Woodley, Redding, Peters, Weatherspoon, and Dennard...and that's just their defense. That's not even to mention draft picks like Golden who should contribute immediately. That poor OL you mentioned was bolstered by Mike Iupati and D.J. Humphries. Their receiving corp and running backs may not be flashy, but don't forget this is a playoff team that was led by Drew Stanton for half the year. Oh, and by the way, Carson Palmer > Andy Dalton.

The Rams added a solid QB, the best RB prospect in the draft, along with a handful of OL help as well. They have solid TEs that have actually put it on the field in the NFL unlike everyone in the entire AFCN not named Heath Miller. They snagged Akeem Ayers and Nick Fairley to add to their great front 7. Mark Barron should be better this year than he played in 2014, but they did just lose one of their potential starters at CB for the year which may hurt them. The Rams didn't really lose much at all, they just improved in most of their negative areas.

The 49ers are in for a rough year, I'm not going to try and justify anything there because I don't think much needs to be said about them.

The Seahawks are likely the best team in the NFL right now, I don't feel I need to justify anything for them either.

You bring up guys like Pitta that won't even play this year, and you also ignore losses like McPhee and Torrey Smith. Personally, I think the Ravens will be fine, but we can't pretend their losses didn't happen without them gaining much overall this offseason. Ngata is a phenomenal player, but they do have guys on the roster to rotate in and do work on the line.

The Bengals had a terribly ranked defense last year, and will likely be without Burfict yet again. MJ, Sims, and Hawk are reasonable additions, but Zimmer is still gone and you didn't seem think Ayers and Fairley were a big deal for the Rams, and the Bengals additions are likely an equivalent to theirs. The Bengals offense should be better this season, Eifert and MLJ are going to be nice to have back.

The Browns still don't have a QB and their coaching is still a huge question mark. You can't completely write off the 49ers and act like the Browns are going to automatically be better than them. Kaepernick is still a playmaker though he's not a great QB. They'll win some games even though you have said in other threads that they may not even win 1 game. They will.

You ignore the impact that losing a Hall of Fame coordinator (LeBeau) will have while mentioning the Cardinals DC as this gigantic loss that they won't be able to overcome. Bowles was their DC for what? 1 or 2 years? The Steelers are losing a guy that is the consensus best DC of the past decade. They also lost Keisel, Taylor, Polamalu, and Worilds among others. That defense is going to be pretty rough. Sure, they'll have a great offense, and I find it completely laughable that you claim they'll still be considered a "very good team" even if their defense is as awful as it looks on paper. Offense alone doesn't win you games. The Steelers defense, right now, looks like it's going to be MUCH worse than any of the high-powered offense based teams in recent memory. They couldn't rush the passer this year and have only lost guys on that side of the ball. They reached for a LB this year so I can't see that being a huge impact move. The only thing I can say positive about that defense is that Mike Mitchell SHOULD be better this season than he has been recently.

Again, keep pretending the AFCN is improving and completely ignore everything the NFCW has done positively. It fits you a lot better when you only look at one side of things, so you should probably stop being a douche to me or else I'll keep making you look like a fool by posting the reality of the situation and not your twisted, spin sessions.

You say the Cardinals picked up people like Lamarr Woodley who is a washed up LB who was cut from the RAIDERS before his contract was even over. Peters who hasn't done much in his career, Weathersoon has been injured the last two years and wasn't that big of an impact for the falcons, and Dennard was cut from the team before training camp. Mike Iupati is a good OL that will help their line, but D.J. Humphries is still a rookie and could be a bust. The Cardinals OL still will need help to overcome how horrible it was last year. Losing Todd Bowles will be a much bigger impact than losing LeBeau, because Arizona was a defensive team last year (Ranked 5th in points allowed), and didn't rely on their offense as much. Pittsburgh was the opposite of that. Palmer isn't better than Dalton.

The Rams might have a good TE, but that's their only good weapon on offense. You can't expect a rookie RB to be that great when he might not even play a lot of the season. The Rams will still be a .500 or worse team, because they don't have a good offense, and they still need to add a few weapons to be competitive.

The Seahawks will not be the best team in the NFL next year. Their OL is going to bring them down. Now I'm not saying, and I have never said that they won't be a good team though.

I already said that the Pittsburgh defense will be one of the worst in the league. Thank for for explaining exactly what I mean on them, but their offense will be one of the best in the league. I don't doubt them when they say they will put up at least 30 points a game. Pittsburgh will be able to keep their drives alive for a long time leaving their defense off the field. Like it or not Pittsburgh will be one of the better teams in the league next year, because their offense will be so good.

The Ravens still have one of the best OL, and one of the better RBs in the league. They still have Steve Smith who is a very good WR, and they picked up one of the WR that I was wanting the Bengals to snag in the draft (who may or may not be a bust). Pitta is expected to return during the season, so why wouldn't I count him on their team? With Jimmy Smith back from his foot injury it will help the Ravens weak secondary from last year. Baltimore will still have one of the better defenses in the league again this year (they were 6th in points allowed last year)

The Bengals will finally have Atkins back to full health, and Burfict will return during the season, and even if he doesn't come back to 100% we added some depth in that position. The Bengals secondary was good last year, and will continue to be good this year. With the addition of Sims, MJ, a healthy Atkins the defense will actually be able to cause some pressure to the QB, and stop the run which was our weakness on defense last year. The offense will actually have people that can make plays this year. A.J. Green will be healthy, Marvin Jones will be healthy, and Eifert will be healthy. Even if you want to say that Eifert won't be that big of a factor Green not having to deal with a foot injury like he did all last year, and Marvin Jones who is a legit #2 receiver and great target in the red zone will help us be able to spread the ball around a lot better. The offense will be a night and day difference than what it was last year

[Brownshoe]

(08-18-2015, 12:22 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If Brownshoe wants to believe the Packers and Seahawks are inferior to the Steelers and the Ravens then let him.  For some reason he has to live in a world where Andy Dalton constantly faces more difficulties and hard luck than Charlie Brown, the Jews, and Job combined.

Yes, the Bengals would LOVE to only have to go through one of the two teams that played in the NFC Championship game to win the division.  Talk about a cake-walk!

I also want to point out that never once did I say the Cardinals/Packers had to compete with the Rams/Bears.  I stated that both of these teams are in divisions where the winner has been exceedingly dominant in the division and against the entire NFL for the majority of the past 4 years.  The Browns, Rams, and the 49ers (now) don't enter into this.  

The last time the Bengals won the "best division in football" (and the only time under your beloved's watch) they were the only team in the division with a winning record, so let's not get too smug.

When did I say the Steelers and the Ravens are better than the Packers and Seahawks. I'm just saying the AFCN is better than the NFCW and NFCN.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-18-2015, 12:56 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: When did I say the Steelers and the Ravens are better than the Packers and Seahawks. I'm just saying the AFCN is better than the NFCW and NFCN.

And i would agree with you. Hard to disagree with us being the toughest Division in football after last season.

All 4 of the teams were in the thick of it to make the Playoffs last season and 3 of them made it.

The only reason i am saying we will not win a Playoff game first is Marv and his previous examples of ineptness.

The players will have to carry us to a Playoff win, which is possible if Geno is really back. But even when Geno was
his old self the Texans handled him in the Playoffs. Which is why i have no faith in Marv coaching us to a win in
the post season. Even our best players cannot show up once we get there.

[*Nately120*]

(08-18-2015, 12:56 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: When did I say the Steelers and the Ravens are better than the Packers and Seahawks. I'm just saying the AFCN is better than the NFCW and NFCN.

I said the Cardinals and Vikings are in divisions with the Seahawks and Packers so they are in divisions with clear-cut division winners.  You are the one that said the Bengals are in a harder division, not me.  My point is that the Cardinals and Vikings are going to have a HARD time winning their respective divisions due to the two best teams in the NFC being in them and therefore more likely to enter the playoffs as a road wild-card team than the Bengals who could win the division and host a playoff game (not that that has done us any good in decades).

That's my point.  You are the one who can never miss a chance to bemoan the ultimate oppressive power of the AFC North.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-18-2015, 10:08 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Every single team in the NFCW had a tougher schedule than any AFCN team in 2014. No wonder we sent 3 teams to the playoffs, not everybody gets to beat up on the historically terrible NFCS and the garbage can AFCS. Saying we're automatically better because we sent more teams to the playoffs is absolutely flawed.

Strength of schedule means very little if you're using a team's record to determine if they were a "tough" team to beat or not. It's a circular argument to make if you think about it. Bengals played team X . Team X had very few wins. Bengals SoS was weak because of team X. But Team X had so many losses because the Bengals (among other teams) beat them.

The AFCS was not a "garbage can" last year. They had 2 teams with winning records. As did every other division except the NFCS (who had 0 winning teams), the AFCN, and the AFCW (who also had 3 teams with winning records).

So basically, your argument is that the AFCN only sent 3 teams to the playoffs because they played the NFCS. So whichever division plays the NFCS this year will also send 3 teams to the playoffs? Or at least will have 3 teams worthy of the playoffs? And in 2013, the division that played the NFCW sent 3 teams to the playoffs, as well?

Or could it be that in 2014, the teams were really that good? Considering they played MORE than just the NFCS, I'm inclined to believe they were really that good. Now, will they be that good this year? That remains to be seen.

[fredtoast]

(08-18-2015, 12:22 PM)Nately120 Wrote: The last time the Bengals won the "best division in football" (and the only time under your beloved's watch) they were the only team in the division with a winning record, so let's not get too smug.

That was the same year the Packers won their division with an 8-7-1 record.

[*Nately120*]

This division talk is way outta left field. I just pointed out that it's hard to gauge who will win a playoff game first because those 2 NFC sleeper picks are presented with situations that almost take winning the division of the table. Face it, the Seahawks and Packers have both routinely finished the season with records better than the Bengals have in their entire existence for the past few years.

Schedule strength isn't the point...when a team in your division can win 12-15 games per season you are going to have a much harder time making the playoffs than a team that hasn't failed to make the playoffs every time Marvin Lewis cracks 9 wins. WHoops did I say that?!

[*Nately120*]

(08-18-2015, 01:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That was the same year the Packers won their division with an 8-7-1 record.

Yep, Aaron Rogers missed significant time for the first time in his career...so that's all it takes for this Bengals team to top the Packers, eh?  No Aaron Rogers?  Seems legit.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-18-2015, 01:14 PM)Nately120 Wrote: This division talk is way outta left field.  I just pointed out that it's hard to gauge who will win a playoff game first because those 2 NFC sleeper picks are presented with situations that almost take winning the division of the table.  Face it, the Seahawks and Packers have both routinely finished the season with records better than the Bengals have in their entire existence for the past few years.

Schedule strength isn't the point...when a team in your division can win 12-15 games per season you are going to have a much harder time making the playoffs than a team that hasn't failed to make the playoffs every time Marvin Lewis cracks 9 wins.  WHoops did I say that?!

Which is harder? Trying to have a better record than 1 great team? Or trying to have a better record than 3 really good teams?

I highly doubt the Packers and Seahawks were doing the tie-breaking gymnastics in their head last year that the Bengals, Steelers, and Ravens were.