|
Post by salcon on Dec 8, 2017 12:47:42 GMT -5
Cowturd's statement is sooo stupid it doesn't even deserve a reaction.
|
|
|
Post by croc on Dec 8, 2017 13:31:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 8, 2017 13:49:31 GMT -5
Lmao. www.google.com/amp/s/www.thephinsider.com/platform/amp/2017/8/24/16195240/pats-success-has-been-helped-by-weak-divisionHere’s another one... with numbers Sheldon, more numbers for you... The AFC East (2002-2013) - The weakest division in the NFL during the BB Era? Much has been made during the Patriots' tremendous run since BB took over the reigns over how weak the AFC East has been over that time. It is thought by many detractors of the Patriots that they've run up big records against these weak opponents, and that has propelled them into the playoffs year after year. But is it true? Is it really the case that the AFC East has been the NFL's weakest division? I will only use the years since the NFL went to the 8-division format, which means looking at 2002-2013. Of course this leaves out one of the Pats' Super Bowl seasons, but oh well. It's just easier this way. First, I looked at each division's overall win total over this 12-year period: (EDIT: The first number here (401, 397, 395, etc) are the raw win totals. I forgot to mention that) 1. AFCE - 401 (.522) 2. NFCE - 397 (.517) 3. NFCS - 395 (.514) 4. AFCS - 393 (.512) 5. AFCN - 390 (.508) 6. AFCW - 375 (.488) 7. NFCN - 368 (.479) 8. NFCW - 347 (.452) Obviously, the AFC East's impressive top ranking is colored by the Patriots' success. So here's the division winning percentages with NE out of the mixture (i.e., the AFCE just has NYJ, Mia, and Buf). 1. NFCE - .517 2. NFCS - .514 3. AFCS - .512 4. AFCN - .508 5. AFCW - .488 6. NFCN - .479 7. NFCW - .452 8. AFCE - .441 But these numbers are colored by New England hammering AFCE opponents. So let's just go with each division's out-of-division games, with New England taken out of the mix. 1. NFCE - .527 2. NFCS - .523 3. AFCS - .519 4. AFCN - .513 5. AFCW - .481 6. NFCN - .467 7. AFCE - .464 8. NFCW - .423 *Note: AFCE - .535 (with NE) So yes, the AFC East has been one of the weaker divisions in the NFL during this time frame, which has undoubtedly benefitted the Patriots. Those number are still not good as they are weighted against the AFC East. Here is why. All the others include the division winner's records for the years they won their divisions. In order to be fair you need to remove those as well. so your numbers don't prove anything. In fact my guess is that if you did that the AFC East would be in the top half. Notice that I said guess. Waiting...... In the last 10 years (2007-2016) taking out the top teams in each conference, the conferences had the following playoff teams (wildcard included) AFC East = 4 (took out Patriots 9) AFC West = 9 (took out Broncos 5) AFC North = 12 (took out Steelers 7) AFC South = 7 (took out Colts 7) NFC East = 11 (took out Cowboys 4) NFC West = 7 (took out Seahawks 6) NFC North = 8 (took out Packers 9) NFC South = 9 (took out Falcons 5) I can continue past 10 years but I'm afraid it might get worse.. not better.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 15:18:55 GMT -5
The only lucky break that mattered is the luckiest draft pick in NFL history; Brady. Anyone with any sense at all can see that (unless otherwise deluded).
(If you remove yourself from homerland, you will see this sentiment is out there.)
|
|
gardnerhey
3rd String but playing on Special Teams
Posts: 841
Likes: 482
|
Post by gardnerhey on Dec 8, 2017 15:27:08 GMT -5
Underlying this discussion is a cultural divide: those that believe in luck (chance ) as a strong determinant of success and those that believe human factors that determine success. I believe we each make the most of our chances or we don't. There's been times I've ignored opportunities in life and there's been times I've recognized opportunities, taken advantage of them and benefited greatly from them. Nonetheless, I am not a pure rugged individualist. I've seen circumstances where it would be difficult for anyone to overcome them. For example, a friend of mine pursued a career in construction, got married early and had several kids early. He also got injured in his early thirties and was unable to work at the same capacity as earlier. At the same time he had several kids to take care of and had no time or money to retrain in a less physically demanding job. He was stuck, having made choices earlier in life that locked him into a lifestyle that was hard to change quickly. Unfortunately, some people are born into very difficult situations where their opportunities are also very limited. Of course, this has little to do with the AFC East, cold weather or a coach with a chip on his shoulder but it has to do with life. We all have to do the best we can with what we're given. You forgot to mention those of use that appreciate chance or by another name luck plays a roll in all human endeavors but does not diminish in any way what so ever the accomplishment brought about by hard work, diligence, resourcefulness, resilience and determination to be the best. You need both.
|
|
|
Post by Examiner on Dec 8, 2017 17:20:32 GMT -5
Does it hurt Gomer P. Horsehead's "legacy"'that he played most of his games against the Jags, Titans and Texans?
|
|
|
Post by ATJ on Dec 8, 2017 17:59:11 GMT -5
Perhaps this has been mentioned in another post and I've missed it but I'd like to pose a couple of questions. Over the years in question how many AFC East teams did the Pats face in the playoffs? How many did they face in the AFCCG? How many did they face in the Super Bowl? With respect to the playoffs I'm guessing perhaps a a couple. With respect to the AFCCG I'm thinking it's zero. And we all know the answer with respect to the SB. What's my point? The rubber meets the road in the post season and the Pats have excelled there.
With respect to luck, I learned a long time ago that fortune favors the prepared mind and in no other endeavor is that more obvious than with the New England Patriots. I could really give a rat's ass if the Pats have benefited from playing in a weak division or if they haven't. They've won more SBs than any other team in the free agency era and they don't play the AFC East in the SB.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 8, 2017 18:17:39 GMT -5
I like this comment... written in December 2014 from the above article. Find the holes, Sheldon because you sure haven’t provided shit to back up your point... do you actually have a point other than trying to argue with everything I say? So sit back in the ole rocker and read along... For a change, try reading for comprehension. I'll try to go through the logic sssllllllooooooowwwwwwlllllllllyyyyyy so perhaps you might be able to follow. The last ranking you showed was for GAMES AGAINST NON-DIVISION OPPONENTS from 2002 to 2016. In that list of eight, the AFC East had the highest win percentage. If they remove the Patriots records, then the AFC East came in seventh. Now I say that by ONLY removing the Patriots (who never had a losing record during that time) skews the results. In order to have COMPARABLE results, you have to put the ones for the Pats back in and then remove the non-division results for all eight division winners for each of those 15 years. That will tell us WHICH DIVISION WINNER FACED THE WEAKEST COMPETITION in the year they were the division winner. Taking the composite tells us which division the also-rans (2nd, 3rd and 4th) was the weakest for the eventual division winners to face. Now, YES or NO. Do you understand what I am saying here? Do you understand why the tables you provided (especially the last one) shows NOTHING about the relative strength of AFC East, though it does say something about the other seven relative to each other. It still doesn't say anything about which division was he easiest for the eventual division winners. Only what I presented above does that. So, THAT is my point. I haven't provided numbers because I simply don't have to time to go and calculate them. All I have done is shown/demonstrated/ proven that your numbers in that last grouping don't say anything in support of your contention that the AFC East is the weakest division. "everyone says" is not any kind of PROOF except between TFB12's ear lobes. If you want to PROVE it, then do the calculations and present them here (if they back you up). Frankly, I believe it won't. Edit: Just for the hell of it, I went back and did some quickie calculations. For 4 team over 15 years playing 10 out of division games that is 520 games. So, for the #4 division listed (.513) that means an out of division record of 267-253. If we say the typical division winner has only a 7-3 out of division record, that means over 15 years it is 105-45. Adjusting the #4 by taking out the division winner then gives 162-208 for the out of division record for the other three teams. That is .438. Gee, the AFC East was .464, which is better than the listed #4. Now look at the #1. The .527 or a record of 274-246. Removing the 105-45 gives 169-201 pr .457. So, if the average division winner's out of division record was 7-3, the this shows that the division with the strongest combination of #2, #3 and #4 teams was -- get this -- the AFC East with a .464! Now let's do a little bending over backwards towards TFB12's benefit. Suppose that it is was a measly 6-4. Well that would make the list #1 percentage be .497 and the #4 team would be .478. The Pats would have been #5. So taking the pessimist 6-4 puts the AFC East at #5 and taking the realistic 7-3 puts it at #1. Now, unless you -- TFB12 -- go back and get the actual numbers, your argument of "the AFC East is the weakest division" has been totally, utterly, completely shattered/demolished/destroyed. It has probably been the HARDEST for for a team to win the division. QED! QED! QED! QED! QED! QED! QED! QED! QED! ROTFLMAOWTIME.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 8, 2017 18:50:59 GMT -5
Those number are still not good as they are weighted against the AFC East. Here is why. All the others include the division winner's records for the years they won their divisions. In order to be fair you need to remove those as well. so your numbers don't prove anything. In fact my guess is that if you did that the AFC East would be in the top half. Notice that I said guess. Waiting...... In the last 10 years (2007-2016) taking out the top teams in each conference, the conferences had the following playoff teams (wildcard included) AFC East = 4 (took out Patriots 9) AFC West = 9 (took out Broncos 5) AFC North = 12 (took out Steelers 7) AFC South = 7 (took out Colts 7) NFC East = 11 (took out Cowboys 4) NFC West = 7 (took out Seahawks 6) NFC North = 8 (took out Packers 9) NFC South = 9 (took out Falcons 5) I can continue past 10 years but I'm afraid it might get worse.. not better. All that shows it that the Patriots have been a consistently great team. That is not news. IOW, so what? Look in another reply of mine how I totally destroyed your contention of the AFC East being easy.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 8, 2017 19:53:47 GMT -5
In the last 10 years (2007-2016) taking out the top teams in each conference, the conferences had the following playoff teams (wildcard included) AFC East = 4 (took out Patriots 9) AFC West = 9 (took out Broncos 5) AFC North = 12 (took out Steelers 7) AFC South = 7 (took out Colts 7) NFC East = 11 (took out Cowboys 4) NFC West = 7 (took out Seahawks 6) NFC North = 8 (took out Packers 9) NFC South = 9 (took out Falcons 5) I can continue past 10 years but I'm afraid it might get worse.. not better. All that shows it that the Patriots have been a consistently great team. That is not news. IOW, so what? Look in another reply of mine how I totally destroyed your contention of the AFC East being easy. LMAO!!!!! It shows more than that, Sheldon... I shows a hell of a lot more than that. In the last 10 years, the Jets, Bills and Dolphins only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!!! (Jets 2 times, Dolphins 2 times and Bills 0 times) Look at the other divisions.... taking out the team that made the playoffs the most in each division, the other teams in the divisions made the playoffs a lot more times than the AFC East.... for example, the AFC North in the last 10 years (taking away the Steelers who made the playoffs 7 times) the Ravens made the playoffs 6 times and the Bengals made the playoffs 6 times, the Browns 0... that is 12 times COMBINED for the rest of the division in the AFC North compared to just 4 in the AFC East. Which is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North? So there are the numbers... over the last 10 years the AFC East is the weakest division, and it's not even close!!! I believe I just totally destroyed you and everyone else here.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 8, 2017 20:48:52 GMT -5
All that shows it that the Patriots have been a consistently great team. That is not news. IOW, so what? Look in another reply of mine how I totally destroyed your contention of the AFC East being easy. LMAO!!!!! It shows more than that, Sheldon... I shows a hell of a lot more than that. In the last 10 years, the Jets, Bills and Dolphins only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!!! (Jets 2 times, Dolphins 2 times and Bills 0 times) Look at the other divisions.... taking out the team that made the playoffs the most in each division, the other teams in the divisions made the playoffs a lot more times than the AFC East.... for example, the AFC North in the last 10 years (taking away the Steelers who made the playoffs 7 times) the Ravens made the playoffs 6 times and the Bengals made the playoffs 6 times, the Browns 0... that is 12 times COMBINED for the rest of the division in the AFC North compared to just 4 in the AFC East. Which is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North? So there are the numbers... over the last 10 years the AFC East is the weakest division, and it's not even close!!! I believe I just totally destroyed you and everyone else here. Believe all you want but you have proven only that the Pats are great. By contrast, in my other reply I ACTUALLY destroyed you. No belief about it. The numbers show that the AFC East teams #2,3 and 4 are somewhere between #5 and #1 in the league against all the other divisions' #2, 3 and 4. The numbers don't lie. The AFC East, if not the strongest is damn close to the strongest.
|
|
|
Post by salcon on Dec 8, 2017 20:52:59 GMT -5
All that shows it that the Patriots have been a consistently great team. That is not news. IOW, so what? Look in another reply of mine how I totally destroyed your contention of the AFC East being easy. LMAO!!!!! It shows more than that, Sheldon... I shows a hell of a lot more than that. In the last 10 years, the Jets, Bills and Dolphins only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!!! (Jets 2 times, Dolphins 2 times and Bills 0 times) Look at the other divisions.... taking out the team that made the playoffs the most in each division, the other teams in the divisions made the playoffs a lot more times than the AFC East.... for example, the AFC North in the last 10 years (taking away the Steelers who made the playoffs 7 times) the Ravens made the playoffs 6 times and the Bengals made the playoffs 6 times, the Browns 0... that is 12 times COMBINED for the rest of the division in the AFC North compared to just 4 in the AFC East. Which is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North? So there are the numbers... over the last 10 years the AFC East is the weakest division, and it's not even close!!! I believe I just totally destroyed you and everyone else here. Dude, how old are you? I hope you're not old enough to legally drink yet because you have some growing up to do.
|
|
|
Post by seattlepat2016 on Dec 8, 2017 21:13:58 GMT -5
This thread reminds me of a very old comic strip from The Far Side. The strip pictured two emaciated prisoners who were hanging by their shackled wrists, in a dungeon. One told the other he was there for some gruesome crime and then asked the other what he was in there for. The other said "I was misquoted"
Everybody is so upset with Cowherd about things he did not actually say - i.e., things that the NESN writer said Cowherd said. If one reads carefully, and makes a distinction between what Cowherd sad and what the writer said... one would find that "four lucky breaks" are words Cowherd did not use... those were words the NESN writer used to add more color to his description of what Cowherd said.
I happen to have watched the Cowherd segment . And what I bolded above was almost exactly what Cowherd was saying. He was saying this dynasty will never happen again. Paraphrasing, he said you're not going to see the one of the greatest coaches ever (Cowherd has called BB the GOAT on occasion) whose long-run success is largely due to an undying desire to win the SB, which in turn is rooted in a huge chip on the shoulder) working with the one of the greatest QBs ever (Cowherd has also called TB GOAT on occasion). Just those two converging is not going to happen again. The two other factors he mentioned were really more like him trying to add more bullets to what his premise, but were minor compared to the two GOATs converging in one team at the same time.
Cowherd only mentioned the word luck in relation to NE ending up drafting TB after passing on him 5 times. We all know Babe sees TB's drafting the same way.
The NESN writer also wrote that "According to Cowherd, the success of the Patriots had nothing to do with intelligence..." Cowherd wasn't saying that. Cowherd is a big fan of very smart people. And pretty often, he refers to BB and TB as the most brilliant coaching and QB minds ever.
I agree, the article is a click bait act. It just was not Cowherd's.
|
|
|
Post by garytx on Dec 8, 2017 21:14:52 GMT -5
I laughed before I opened this article knowing it would be written to get clicks. Nevetheless, I was hoping for something more insightful than this re-tread drivel. Cowherd asserts the Pats dynasty is based on 4 lucky breaks: the Parecells/BB chip on your shoulder football approach, luckily selecting TB who has a similar chip on his shoulder, playing in the dreadful AFC East and playing in cold weather. Nowhere is their a discussion about how one makes ones luck through the choices one makes in each situation one faces or Kraft slyly giving a top draft pick to get BB to come over from the Jets because he knew the tone BB would set. The Patriots philosophy of success through sacrifice for the team is totally ignored as is creating a middle class of players who are intelligent, versatile athletes who can function in multiple roles competently at reasonable cost. The AFC characterization has been proven to be fraudulent when compared with other divisions. And asserting cold weather better prepares a team for success ignores the success of other non cold weather dynasties like the Cowboys (1966-85) and the 49ers (1983-1998). So according to Cowherd the Pats success has nothing to do with the intelligence which has fostered their philosophy, nothing to do with developing talent in an era of free agency, nothing to do with creating a team-centric approach, nothing to do with anything but luck! IMO, Cowherd is the one who is lucky to have anyone read or listen to his crap. Here is a link but if you are too lazy to open and laugh you'll find the article just below: The New England Patriots have been NFL royalty for the past 16 seasons, and Colin Cowherd believes there won’t ever be another dynasty like the one that currently resides in New England. But it’s not as much of a compliment as you might think. The popular FS1 commentator discussed the Patriots’ dynasty Wednesday on “The Herd,” and he explained that a lot of New England’s success is due to four lucky breaks. Yes, you read that right. New England’s first break, according to Cowherd, was being able to get Bill Belichick. “There are four things that will never, ever be aligned like this again,” Cowherd said. “They have the ultimate, brilliant chip-on-the-shoulder head coach. Bill Belichick, living in the shadow of Bill Parcells, has had a chip on his shoulder forever. And you know what the chip on the shoulder does for people? It is a lifetime of drive. So the next great head coach happens to be in New England with a massive chip on his shoulder. Doesn’t want to write books, doesn’t want to be on TV, doesn’t want to do press conferences, he’s all football.” If Belichick is reason No. 1, then, of course, Tom Brady comes next. “Number two, he just happens to draft and get lucky, by the way, he passed on him five times. Belichick gets Tom Brady, who wasn’t loved in the draft, who wasn’t loved at Michigan. The ultimate chip-on-the-shoulder quarterback. They align.” And we can’t forget about how bad the AFC East has been, right Colin? “Then they also have another unbelievable break,” Cowherd continued. “They play in the most dysfunctional division in football. The (New York) Jets, (Buffalo) Bills and (Miami) Dolphins have players, their front offices are a mess. There’s no other division with that kind of mess, allowing them to experiment in September, allowing them to use the Bills to steal players from the Bills, knowing six times a year they go into games with a better quarterback, a better front office, a better head coach, giving them byes in the playoffs and home-field advantage.” Cowherd’s fourth reason has to do with the Patriots playing in cold weather, and how that helps them prepare for the playoffs. Read more at: nesn.com/2017/12/colin-cowherd-believes-patriots-dynasty-is-based-on-four-lucky-breaks/The first two I don't call luck. Belichick had a good relationship with Kraft and when the job came up BB was offerred it. I don't understand what this has to do with luck. Everyone had a shot at Brady. The Pats did 5 times. So how is this luck? It's not like he slid in the first round and the Pats got him with the 28th pick. I guess the luck has to do with the chip on their shoulders? The Pats do belong in a disfunctional division. Coach and GM changes every year it seems. Playing in cold weather might get you through the playoffs but the SB is played in a dome.
|
|
jetsnhl
On the Game Day Roster
Posts: 346
Likes: 112
|
Post by jetsnhl on Dec 8, 2017 21:26:55 GMT -5
All that shows it that the Patriots have been a consistently great team. That is not news. IOW, so what? Look in another reply of mine how I totally destroyed your contention of the AFC East being easy. LMAO!!!!! It shows more than that, Sheldon... I shows a hell of a lot more than that. In the last 10 years, the Jets, Bills and Dolphins only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!!! (Jets 2 times, Dolphins 2 times and Bills 0 times) Look at the other divisions.... taking out the team that made the playoffs the most in each division, the other teams in the divisions made the playoffs a lot more times than the AFC East.... for example, the AFC North in the last 10 years (taking away the Steelers who made the playoffs 7 times) the Ravens made the playoffs 6 times and the Bengals made the playoffs 6 times, the Browns 0... that is 12 times COMBINED for the rest of the division in the AFC North compared to just 4 in the AFC East. Which is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North? So there are the numbers... over the last 10 years the AFC East is the weakest division, and it's not even close!!! I believe I just totally destroyed you and everyone else here. No you didn't. To me it just shows that the Patriots knocked the other teams in the AFC east down because they were focusing to much of trying to beat the Patriots and didn't prepare enough for other teams
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 8, 2017 21:41:56 GMT -5
LMAO!!!!! It shows more than that, Sheldon... I shows a hell of a lot more than that. In the last 10 years, the Jets, Bills and Dolphins only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!!! (Jets 2 times, Dolphins 2 times and Bills 0 times) Look at the other divisions.... taking out the team that made the playoffs the most in each division, the other teams in the divisions made the playoffs a lot more times than the AFC East.... for example, the AFC North in the last 10 years (taking away the Steelers who made the playoffs 7 times) the Ravens made the playoffs 6 times and the Bengals made the playoffs 6 times, the Browns 0... that is 12 times COMBINED for the rest of the division in the AFC North compared to just 4 in the AFC East. Which is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North? So there are the numbers... over the last 10 years the AFC East is the weakest division, and it's not even close!!! I believe I just totally destroyed you and everyone else here. Believe all you want but you have proven only that the Pats are great. By contrast, in my other reply I ACTUALLY destroyed you. No belief about it. The numbers show that the AFC East teams #2,3 and 4 are somewhere between #5 and #1 in the league against all the other divisions' #2, 3 and 4. The numbers don't lie. The AFC East, if not the strongest is damn close to the strongest. OMG, the numbers are right there clear as day... all the teams in the other division make the playoffs a lot more than the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. The AFC is freaking weak, dude... In the last 10 years (2007-2016) taking out the top teams in each conference, the conferences had the following playoff teams (wildcard included) AFC East = 4 (took out Patriots 9) AFC West = 9 (took out Broncos 5) AFC North = 12 (took out Steelers 7) AFC South = 7 (took out Colts 7) NFC East = 11 (took out Cowboys 4) NFC West = 7 (took out Seahawks 6) NFC North = 8 (took out Packers 9) NFC South = 9 (took out Falcons 5) In 10 years the other teams in the AFC East only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!! Pats play teams in the division 6 times each year and those teams only made the playoffs 4 times in 10 years. You don't think that's a weak division? Which division is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North?(hint.. It's an easy answer and it's not even close!!) WAITING............... Here's another question for you... the Pats swap divisions with the Cowboys... are the Pats in a tougher or easier division? How about the Cowboys.. are they in a tougher or easier division? WAITING.............
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 8, 2017 21:44:20 GMT -5
LMAO!!!!! It shows more than that, Sheldon... I shows a hell of a lot more than that. In the last 10 years, the Jets, Bills and Dolphins only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!!! (Jets 2 times, Dolphins 2 times and Bills 0 times) Look at the other divisions.... taking out the team that made the playoffs the most in each division, the other teams in the divisions made the playoffs a lot more times than the AFC East.... for example, the AFC North in the last 10 years (taking away the Steelers who made the playoffs 7 times) the Ravens made the playoffs 6 times and the Bengals made the playoffs 6 times, the Browns 0... that is 12 times COMBINED for the rest of the division in the AFC North compared to just 4 in the AFC East. Which is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North? So there are the numbers... over the last 10 years the AFC East is the weakest division, and it's not even close!!! I believe I just totally destroyed you and everyone else here. Dude, how old are you? I hope you're not old enough to legally drink yet because you have some growing up to do. Why don't you say that to the 70+ year old dude that says it! I'm handing out L's all over the place here and you guys just can't even admit it. Unbelievable... Denial is a terrible thing!
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 8, 2017 23:15:41 GMT -5
LMAO!!!!! It shows more than that, Sheldon... I shows a hell of a lot more than that. In the last 10 years, the Jets, Bills and Dolphins only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!!! (Jets 2 times, Dolphins 2 times and Bills 0 times) Look at the other divisions.... taking out the team that made the playoffs the most in each division, the other teams in the divisions made the playoffs a lot more times than the AFC East.... for example, the AFC North in the last 10 years (taking away the Steelers who made the playoffs 7 times) the Ravens made the playoffs 6 times and the Bengals made the playoffs 6 times, the Browns 0... that is 12 times COMBINED for the rest of the division in the AFC North compared to just 4 in the AFC East. Which is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North? So there are the numbers... over the last 10 years the AFC East is the weakest division, and it's not even close!!! I believe I just totally destroyed you and everyone else here. Believe all you want but you have proven only that the Pats are great. By contrast, in my other reply I ACTUALLY destroyed you. No belief about it. The numbers show that the AFC East teams #2,3 and 4 are somewhere between #5 and #1 in the league against all the other divisions' #2, 3 and 4. The numbers don't lie. The AFC East, if not the strongest is damn close to the strongest. TFB12, do you know the difference between you and me? Here it is. When I ask for proof, and it is presented to me showing that I was wrong, I am man enough to admit I was wrong (and you even corroborated that I do). You, when presented with the cold, hard numbers proving you are wrong are incapable of admitting it. The number clearly show that when one looks at the out of division won-lost records for the #2,3 and 4 teams in each division, that over the past 15 years the AFC East is somewhere between the fifth and first first strongest division and that it is most likely closer to first. The out of division won-lost records for the #2,3 and 4 is the single, clearest, totally objective measure of how hard it was for the division winner to win that division. It says how hard it would be to beat the teams in your own division, given how they do against everyone else. C'mon man up and admit that I just destroyed you. That way we can move on to other topics.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 8, 2017 23:25:29 GMT -5
Sheldon, I’m still waiting for your answers here.
You play in a tough division your wins are harder to get when you play each team twice. The Patriots should have a better record than any other team because they are playing the easiest division. The other teams in the division have only been to the playoffs 4 times combined in 10 years. It’s the easiest division in all the NFL. I continue to prove it...
Let’s try this again....
OMG, the numbers are right there clear as day... all the teams in the other division make the playoffs a lot more than the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. The AFC East is freaking weak, dude...
In the last 10 years (2007-2016) taking out the top teams in each conference, the conferences had the following playoff teams (wildcard included)
AFC East = 4 (took out Patriots 9) AFC West = 9 (took out Broncos 5) AFC North = 12 (took out Steelers 7) AFC South = 7 (took out Colts 7) NFC East = 11 (took out Cowboys 4) NFC West = 7 (took out Seahawks 6) NFC North = 8 (took out Packers 9) NFC South = 9 (took out Falcons 5)
In 10 years the other teams in the AFC East only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!! Pats play teams in the division 6 times each year and those teams only made the playoffs 4 times in 10 years. You don't think that's a weak division?
Which division is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North?
(hint.. It's an easy answer and it's not even close!!)
WAITING...............
Here's another question for you... the Pats swap divisions with the Cowboys... are the Pats in a tougher or easier division? How about the Cowboys.. are they in a tougher or easier division?
WAITING.............
I own you every time I post this. Answer the damn questions, Sheldon. Stop dodging it, this totally proves the Pats are in the easiest division.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 8, 2017 23:28:02 GMT -5
Believe all you want but you have proven only that the Pats are great. By contrast, in my other reply I ACTUALLY destroyed you. No belief about it. The numbers show that the AFC East teams #2,3 and 4 are somewhere between #5 and #1 in the league against all the other divisions' #2, 3 and 4. The numbers don't lie. The AFC East, if not the strongest is damn close to the strongest. OMG, the numbers are right there clear as day... all the teams in the other division make the playoffs a lot more than the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. The AFC is freaking weak, dude... In the last 10 years (2007-2016) taking out the top teams in each conference, the conferences had the following playoff teams (wildcard included) AFC East = 4 (took out Patriots 9) AFC West = 9 (took out Broncos 5) AFC North = 12 (took out Steelers 7) AFC South = 7 (took out Colts 7) NFC East = 11 (took out Cowboys 4) NFC West = 7 (took out Seahawks 6) NFC North = 8 (took out Packers 9) NFC South = 9 (took out Falcons 5) In 10 years the other teams in the AFC East only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!! Pats play teams in the division 6 times each year and those teams only made the playoffs 4 times in 10 years. You don't think that's a weak division? Which division is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North?(hint.. It's an easy answer and it's not even close!!) WAITING............... Here's another question for you... the Pats swap divisions with the Cowboys... are the Pats in a tougher or easier division? How about the Cowboys.. are they in a tougher or easier division? WAITING............. Again. Those numbers are meaningless other than showing how consistently great the Pats are. The REAL numbers are as I produced which you so very conveniently ignore. Which division is the tougher division between those two in bold? Hard to say. If the average of division winners in all non-division games is only 6-4, then the AFC North is slightly (and I mean slightly) tougher. If, as I believe, the average of division winners in non-division games is more like 7-3, then it is the AFC East -- and by a significant margin. I am still waiting for you to do the actual numbers. Note, by tougher division I mean the competition for the division winner. That is the #2, #3 and #4 teams -- because that is all that is important. If you were to include division winners, which you shouldn't, then the AFC East is by far and away the hardest division. As for switching the Pats and Cowboys? The Pats would be in an easier division regardless of whether it was 7-3 or 6-4. Ditto for the Cowboys. They would be playing in a tougher division. That is what the cold, hard numbers say. Look at my posts and TRY to understand. I know it is hard for you to admit you are wrong, and you are so extremely stubborn (as we saw with that ridiculous driver's seat statement that persisted for weeks on end), but do us all a favor and at least try to comprehend the significance of those numbers. They are there for you in black and white.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 8, 2017 23:40:30 GMT -5
OMG, the numbers are right there clear as day... all the teams in the other division make the playoffs a lot more than the Jets, Bills and Dolphins. The AFC is freaking weak, dude... In the last 10 years (2007-2016) taking out the top teams in each conference, the conferences had the following playoff teams (wildcard included) AFC East = 4 (took out Patriots 9) AFC West = 9 (took out Broncos 5) AFC North = 12 (took out Steelers 7) AFC South = 7 (took out Colts 7) NFC East = 11 (took out Cowboys 4) NFC West = 7 (took out Seahawks 6) NFC North = 8 (took out Packers 9) NFC South = 9 (took out Falcons 5) In 10 years the other teams in the AFC East only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED!! Pats play teams in the division 6 times each year and those teams only made the playoffs 4 times in 10 years. You don't think that's a weak division? Which division is the tougher division... AFC EAST or AFC North?(hint.. It's an easy answer and it's not even close!!) WAITING............... Here's another question for you... the Pats swap divisions with the Cowboys... are the Pats in a tougher or easier division? How about the Cowboys.. are they in a tougher or easier division? WAITING............. Again. Those numbers are meaningless other than showing how consistently great the Pats are. The REAL numbers are as I produced which you so very conveniently ignore. Which division is the tougher division between those two in bold? Hard to say. If the average of division winners in all non-division games is only 6-4, then the AFC North is slightly (and I mean slightly) tougher. If, as I believe, the average of division winners in non-division games is more like 7-3, then it is the AFC East -- and by a significant margin. I am still waiting for you to do the actual numbers. Note, by tougher division I mean the competition for the division winner. That is the #2, #3 and #4 teams -- because that is all that is important. If you were to include division winners, which you shouldn't, then the AFC East is by far and away the hardest division. As for switching the Pats and Cowboys? The Pats would be in an easier division regardless of whether it was 7-3 or 6-4. Ditto for the Cowboys. They would be playing in a tougher division. That is what the cold, hard numbers say. Look at my posts and TRY to understand. I know it is hard for you to admit you are wrong, and you are so extremely stubborn (as we saw with that ridiculous driver's seat statement that persisted for weeks on end), but do us all a favor and at least try to comprehend the significance of those numbers. They are there for you in black and white. Unbelievable. Do you honestly and seriously believe the shit you spew Sheldon? Those numbers are not meaningless. Are you really going to make that claim? Every other division in the NFL has more teams going to the playoffs than the AFC EAST. The Jets, Bills and Dolphins have been to the playoffs 4 times in the last 10 years! That’s a weak F’ing division. Those numbers tell the story, Sheldon. You can continue to act dumb and act like you don’t understand what the hell is going on but even I think your smarter than that. I continue to feed you L’s here, you look like a complete knuckle head. You are so stubborn you can’t even admit your wrong when it’s clear as day!! Those numbers don’t mean anything... lmao! They mean everything, Sheldon. Be a man and accept that you are wrong here.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Dec 8, 2017 23:45:10 GMT -5
Kinda wish he didn't explain it so well. Is he trying to educate the dumb ones? Make himself look smart..? Sell clicks on his web site? Thing is. Really smart would be to let the dumb keep being dumb ...lol. But its good to have the right ratio, I guess. but ... The really dumb will always be dumb.. Lol. You can bet on that... That's part of being dumb. (hands over ears and eyes)... Lol.
|
|
donholman
On the Game Day Roster
Posts: 429
Likes: 151
|
Post by donholman on Dec 8, 2017 23:48:37 GMT -5
This "AFC East is weak" argument is a ridiculous one to criticize the Pats for. They play the schedule they're given. And note how those "strong" division teams usually lose against the Pats? And how come the Pats do fine against the top AFC North team (Steelers), but struggle relatively against the 2nd best (Ravens)? It's ridiculous to make sports generalizations like this, and who cares anyway.
Yet, you gotta feel sorry for the Bills, Dolphins and Jets. Besides the futility of going up against the Pats twice a year, any out-of-division team they play has tremendous fresh instructional video on how to beat them.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Dec 8, 2017 23:55:31 GMT -5
Still love the word "lucky"
20 pages predicted on top of the 20 pages on lucky thread last year... Lol.
"Like the legend of the phoenix
All ends with beginnings
What keeps the planet spinning (uh)
The force of love beginning
We've come too far to give up who we are
So let's raise the bar and our cups to the stars
She's up all night 'til the sun
I'm up all night to get some
She's up all night for good fun
I'm up all night to get lucky"
daft punk. "get lucky" (verse 1)
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 9, 2017 0:02:19 GMT -5
This "AFC East is weak" argument is a ridiculous one to criticize the Pats for. They play the schedule they're given. And note how those "strong" division teams usually lose against the Pats? And how come the Pats do fine against the top AFC North team (Steelers), but struggle relatively against the 2nd best (Ravens)? It's ridiculous to make sports generalizations like this, and who cares anyway. Yet, you gotta feel sorry for the Bills, Dolphins and Jets. Besides the futility of going up against the Pats twice a year, any out-of-division team they play has tremendous fresh instructional video on how to beat them. I’m not criticizing the Pats for anything. I’m proving the people who say the Pats are in the weakest division are correct when they say that. The AFC East is the weakest division in the NFL over the past 10 seasons. There isn’t a debate.. it’s as true as it gets. Why do the Pats do fine against the top AFC North team? Because they are the better team. They have the best QB and coach to ever play and coach the game. No denying that... but they play in the weakest division. They can’t help being in the weakest division but when people say the Pats play in the weakest division... they are right. Don’t get so butt hurt over it. Maybe if they were in a tougher division they would have a couple more losses each season, maybe they only make it to 5 SBs instead of 7. Who knows... the fact is, they play in the weakest division over the past 10 years... probably longer, I have the data from 2000, if I continue, I’m pretty confident it will show the Pats have played in one of the weakest divisions for the past 17 years. I’m sorry that people here can’t accept that, but it’s true.
|
|