Rank Your Nfl Teams!

[BmoreRav]

[quote name='darklight1216' post='194812' date='May 24 2009, 08:43 PM']So I guess the Eagles aren't top tier? Neither were the number one seeded, [b]winningest[/b] team in the NFL, Titans?[/quote]

That's easily the worst word ever created by the US, i whenever i see or hear it!!!!!!!
Do you use the word losingest over there aswell? jk

[MagicianCamille]

Bottom line is rankings are hard to do accurately. Teams match up very differently against each other. For instance, we dominated the Eagles when we played them, but they dominated the Giants who absolutely crushed us. Luckily Football is one of those sports where all that matters is how you play against who you're facing on Sunday(Or Monday, or Thursday, or the rare Saturday...wow I remember when Sunday meant something even though I'm not even old).

I think the Eagles will do well this year, as they did last year, but I don't ever buy it when people think teams will improve greatly because of signing [b]rookies[/b]...

...except for Michael Oher.

[lowrider]

1.PIT
2. NE
3.NYG
4.BAL
5. PHI
6.CHI
7.MIN
8.TEN
9.SD
10.IND
11.MIA
12.NO
13.DAL
14.ARI
15.CAR
16. ATL
17.NYJ
18.KC
19.HOU
20.DEN
21.GB
22.JAX
23.BUC
24.WSH
25.BUF
26.CIN
27.CLE
28.SF
29.SEA
30.STL
31.OAK
32.DET

[macbrak]

Whats with all the Giants love? Top 3? meh.

Pats probably shouldn't be top 3 either, Tom Brady will never be who he was. He doesn't care about football as much and probably could never get back to where he was if he did with the injury.

[lowrider]

[quote name='macbrak' post='194934' date='May 25 2009, 10:54 AM']Whats with all the Giants love? Top 3? meh.

Pats probably shouldn't be top 3 either, Tom Brady will never be who he was. He doesn't care about football as much and probably could never get back to where he was if he did with the injury.[/quote]
Last year for half the season the Giants were steamrolling over people. Then plax messed them up and was a huge distraction. Their defense is sick and they have a really strong running game. Eli is solid. I just like that team.

How would you not put the Pats in the top 3? After Brady got hurt everyone thought the Pats were done. But a backup quarterback lead them to win 11 games. Before last year no one thought Matt Cassel was anything. But he lead the Patriots to be 11-5. Thats more of a compliment of how talented the rest of the team is. I think Cassel is a system guy considering who he had to throw to. The Patriots team is so good.

Brady doesnt care about football? What? He won 3 superbowls and his team almost had a perfect season and he had a ridiculously good season. So if he was tired of football, wouldnt he stop after a superbowl? Wouldnt his stats decrease and his performance drop? But no he kept going and had his best season of his career. He is not sick of quarterback. And if i know the competitor Brady he is, he must have been dying watching Cassel take his team while Brady did nothing. I know after i tore my ACL I couldnt wait to do any kind of sport and all my competitive drive was held in for months, just dying to unleash it. I bet you Brady is the same way.

Quarterback is a position where your legs arent as important. But his arm and his mind are more important. Realistically you need to be able to generate some power from your legs and plant on your foot to step and throw. So he loses a little length on his throw. Thats not that big of a deal with the arm he has.

[ROH522155]

[quote name='pick-ups' post='194828' date='May 24 2009, 04:44 PM']Why don't you ask the Steelers and Giants about that.(Eagles 3-1)
Two teams that are better and had their way with the Ravens.(Ravens 0-4)[/quote]


SHUT UP ABOUT THAT ALREADY!!! The Browns beat the giants and the Giants beat the Steelers does that mean that Cleveland is better than Pittsburgh?? NO! NOT AT ALL!!! What matters is head to head matchups!!!!!


[b][size=6]RAVENS 36 Eagles 7!!!!!!!!!!!![/size][/b]

[ROH522155]

haha "the Ravens offense doesnt scare anybody" hahahaha 36 POINTS!!!! wat happened to to your defense???

[lowrider]

[quote name='ravensorioleshoyas522155' post='194948' date='May 25 2009, 12:43 PM']SHUT UP ABOUT THAT ALREADY!!! The Browns beat the giants and the Giants beat the Steelers does that mean that Cleveland is better than Pittsburgh?? NO! NOT AT ALL!!! What matters is head to head matchups!!!!!


[b][size=6]RAVENS 36 Eagles 7!!!!!!!!!!!![/size][/b][/quote]
I mean that is just one game so i dont know how much you take from that. But you're right. Just because team A beat team B and team B beat team C, doesnt mean that team A will beat team C. Otherwise the Eagles, Colts, Giants, and Tennessee should be the Super bowl champions because they all beat the steelers.

Both the Eagles and Ravens have improved from last year and the eagles havent improved enough to surpass the ravens.

[pick-ups]

[quote name='lowrider' post='194963' date='May 25 2009, 11:29 AM']I mean that is just one game so i dont know how much you take from that. But you're right. Just because team A beat team B and team B beat team C, doesnt mean that team A will beat team C. Otherwise the Eagles, Colts, Giants, and Tennessee should be the Super bowl champions because they all beat the steelers.

[b]Both the Eagles and Ravens have improved from last year and the eagles havent improved enough to surpass the ravens.[/b][/quote]
Think what you want about the Eagles,but the fact is that the Ravens really do not matter to the Eagles just as the Eagles do not matter to the Ravens unless these teams meet in the SB then I guess we'll never know,nor will it matter.

The Eagles added a lot more to an already potent offense(Peters/Stacey&Shawn Andrews/Maclin/McCoy/Ingram).
The Ravens added Oher(who I like)LJ Smith(good luck) and who else?

Theres no question the Eagles offense is already better and a top ten while the Raven are in the bottom half of the league in offense.

The defenses are very comparible(2 and 3)respectfully.

Again what have the Ravens added as opposed to the Eagles additions that makes them better heading into this season?

[ROH522155]

okay, last year our offense was better than it had been in years AND its only getting better. I dont expect it to be in the bottom half of the league any longer.

[pick-ups]

[quote name='ravensorioleshoyas522155' post='194985' date='May 25 2009, 01:10 PM']okay, last year our offense was better than it had been in years AND its only getting better. I dont expect it to be in the bottom half of the league any longer.[/quote]
Your probably right.

We'll see in year two of Flacco.

[darklight1216]

[quote name='pick-ups' post='194965' date='May 25 2009, 02:43 PM']Think what you want about the Eagles,but the fact is that the Ravens really do not matter to the Eagles just as the Eagles do not matter to the Ravens unless these teams meet in the SB then I guess we'll never know,nor will it matter.

The Eagles added a lot more to an already potent offense(Peters/Stacey&Shawn Andrews/Maclin/McCoy/Ingram).
The Ravens added Oher(who I like)LJ Smith(good luck) and who else?

Theres no question the Eagles offense is already better and a top ten while the Raven are in the bottom half of the league in offense.

The defenses are very comparible(2 and 3)respectfully.

Again what have the Ravens added as opposed to the Eagles additions that makes them better heading into this season?[/quote]
The Bengals have added alot of players as well, but how many of us really think that they are a top five team?
The Cowboys usually make some very interesting moves in the offseason as well, and what has it done for them?
The Steelers are usually quiet in their offseasons and how many Superbowls have then won recently?

I know that we were one of the lowest teams in overall offense, but in scoring we were 24th in 2007 and 11th in 2008. So, as someone pointed out, we've greatly improved. I believe it was John Madden who said "The team that scores the most points usually wins."

[pick-ups]

[quote name='darklight1216' post='195000' date='May 25 2009, 01:29 PM']The Bengals have added alot of players as well, but how many of us really think that they are a top five team?
The Cowboys usually make some very interesting moves in the offseason as well, and what has it done for them?
The Steelers are usually quiet in their offseasons and how many Superbowls have then won recently?

[b]I know that we were one of the lowest teams in overall offense, but in scoring we were 24th in 2007 and 11th in 2008. So, as someone pointed out, we've greatly improved.[/b] I believe it was John Madden who said "The team that scores the most points usually wins."[/quote]
The Eagles were 6th in the league in scoring and added a lot of(potential)weapons so I can see how they couldn't of really improved..

[darklight1216]

[quote name='pick-ups' post='195006' date='May 25 2009, 04:43 PM']The Eagles were 6th in the league in scoring and added a lot of(potential)weapons so I can see how they couldn't of really improved.. [/quote]
O.o I never said that the Eagles didn't improve last year, I simply pointed out that the Ravens did.

[pick-ups]

[quote name='darklight1216' post='195013' date='May 25 2009, 01:58 PM']O.o I never said that the Eagles didn't improve last year, I simply pointed out that the Ravens did.[/quote]
I hear ya...

[lowrider]

[quote name='pick-ups' post='194965' date='May 25 2009, 02:43 PM']Think what you want about the Eagles,but the fact is that the Ravens really do not matter to the Eagles just as the Eagles do not matter to the Ravens unless these teams meet in the SB then I guess we'll never know,nor will it matter.

The Eagles added a lot more to an already potent offense(Peters/Stacey&Shawn Andrews/Maclin/McCoy/Ingram).
The Ravens added Oher(who I like)LJ Smith(good luck) and who else?

Theres no question the Eagles offense is already better and a top ten while the Raven are in the bottom half of the league in offense.

The defenses are very comparible(2 and 3)respectfully.

Again what have the Ravens added as opposed to the Eagles additions that makes them better heading into this season?[/quote]

The Ravens added Oher (took care of a position we needed last year) and added depth to our cornerbacks (which was the weakest hole on our defense). Flacco and our offensive line is one year better. The best pickup the Eagles made was Peters. The rest of the pickups they made wont make that big of an effect (such as Maclin, it takes a few years for wide recievers to develop). The Ravens didnt need any big pickups. Just filling in a few cracks. Think about it. We have the top 5 defense and top 5 running game every year. All we need is our quarterback to develop. Thats a terrifying thought

[quote name='pick-ups' post='195006' date='May 25 2009, 04:43 PM']The Eagles were 6th in the league in scoring and added a lot of(potential)weapons so I can see how they couldn't of really improved.. [/quote]
If the Eagles were 6th in the league in scoring and 3 in defense why didnt they even come close to the Ravens last year?

[pick-ups]

[quote name='lowrider' post='195047' date='May 25 2009, 05:55 PM']The Ravens added Oher (took care of a position we needed last year) and added depth to our cornerbacks (which was the weakest hole on our defense). Flacco and our offensive line is one year better. The best pickup the Eagles made was Peters. The rest of the pickups they made wont make that big of an effect (such as Maclin, it takes a few years for wide recievers to develop). The Ravens didnt need any big pickups. Just filling in a few cracks. Think about it. We have the top 5 defense and top 5 running game every year. All we need is our quarterback to develop. Thats a terrifying thought


If the Eagles were 6th in the league in scoring and 3 in defense why didnt they even come close to the Ravens last year?[/quote]
Lets see the Ravens were 2nd on defense(set there)and 18th in offense(need more help than you would like to admit/added Oher)
The Eagle were 3rd in defense(set there)and 9th in offense(added Peters/both Andrews Bros/Maclin/McCoy/and Ingram).

Rookie WRs take a while to develop......then what would you call DeSean(62 rec 912 yds and 4 TDs)?
By the way Maclin wasn't a need but a BPA(best player available)and will immediately help out in the return game and see time at WR.

Oher's nice but very unproven while Peters has shown that he does dominate and is one of the best at the position.
What else has the Ravens even added on their already average offense that could match(Maclin/McCoy/Ingram/Andrews)for the Eagles?
Oher wouldn't start on the Eagles already dominant O-line and thats the best they've done offensively?
Pull off the purple shades already as the Ravens are a nice team,but in fact are not better than the Eagles.

A very good defense and good offensive team who has added a lot of weapons(Eagles)compared to a very good defensive team with an average offense(Ravens)doesn't prove your homer theory.

[darklight1216]

[quote name='pick-ups' post='195066' date='May 25 2009, 10:37 PM']Pull off the purple shades already as the Ravens are a nice team,but in fact are not better than the Eagles.

A very good defense and good offensive team who has added a lot of weapons(Eagles)compared to a very good defensive team with an average offense(Ravens)doesn't prove your homer theory.[/quote]
As much fun as watching offseason arguments unfold is, let's face it: this is just paper (so to speak) and the game is played on the field. We won't know how good the teams are until September and we won't see the Ravens match up against the Eagles for a few years unless, of course, the NFL sees a Birdbowl in February.

Until that time we Ravens fans just have to deal with the fact that our team just wasn't good enough to go to the Superbowl last year. And Eagles fans are going to have to endure the fact that their "very good defense and good offensive team" got stomped by the Ravens. Even though Philly beat the Steelers last year and even though the Steelers beat the Ravens three times, both Baltimore and Pittsburgh have done what the Eagles have yet to do: win the Superbowl.

This is how things stand and it isn't going to change. (At least for a few months.)

Oh I seem to have hit my 1,000th post.

[lowrider]

[quote name='pick-ups' post='195066' date='May 25 2009, 10:37 PM']Lets see the Ravens were 2nd on defense(set there)and 18th in offense(need more help than you would like to admit/added Oher)
The Eagle were 3rd in defense(set there)and 9th in offense(added Peters/both Andrews Bros/Maclin/McCoy/and Ingram).

Rookie WRs take a while to develop......then what would you call DeSean(62 rec 912 yds and 4 TDs)?
By the way Maclin wasn't a need but a BPA(best player available)and will immediately help out in the return game and see time at WR.

Oher's nice but very unproven while Peters has shown that he does dominate and is one of the best at the position.
What else has the Ravens even added on their already average offense that could match(Maclin/McCoy/Ingram/Andrews)for the Eagles?
Oher wouldn't start on the Eagles already dominant O-line and thats the best they've done offensively?
Pull off the purple shades already as the Ravens are a nice team,but in fact are not better than the Eagles.

A very good defense and good offensive team who has added a lot of weapons(Eagles)compared to a very good defensive team with an average offense(Ravens)doesn't prove your homer theory.[/quote]
But if the Eagles were ranked so much higher, why did the Ravens smash them last year? Yes it was one game. But blow outs dont just happen.

Maclin wasnt a need? Considering McNabb wanted a reciever otherwise he was thinking about not restructoring his contract. Rookie WR's put up decent but inconsistant numbers. When i say a player needs to develop doesnt means i say that wont produce at all. Desean wasnt reliable and consistant.

You're not understanding that adding stuff to our offense isnt going to make our team drastically better. The development of our offensive line and Flacco will help our offense more than bringing in anyone to improve the offense. We had the youngest offensive line in the NFL last year with a rookie quarterback. Every year they are going to improve together. Unlike McNabb who is only going to get worse with one more years time. The stars of the Eagles are getting old and worse. When the Ravens stars are maturing (especially for Ray because he is immortal). The Ravens offense is only going to improve.

[MagicianCamille]

Ravens and Eagles went the exact same distance last year. They both lost in their respective conference's championship games. Therefore all you can do is go back to the only head-to-head match up they had, which the Ravens dominated in. Any argument that says the Eagles are better before any more games are played is completely unfounded, as off-season acquisitions are meaningless until a game is played.

Also, I agree completely with Darklight.

[CustomUserName]

[quote name='lowrider']But if the Eagles were ranked so much higher, why did the Ravens smash them last year? Yes it was one game. But blow outs dont just happen.[/quote]

Yes, and the week before Philly tied with the Bengals, so by your logic the Bengals could have made the NFC championship game, I mean ties just don't happen. Dude, the Eagles were in a slump when we beat them, it's not who you play but when you play them. I am a Ravens fan since they drafted Ray Lewis, and I have to admit that the Eagles as of right now on paper are the best team in the NFL.

[quote name='lowrider']Maclin wasnt a need? Considering McNabb wanted a reciever otherwise he was thinking about not restructoring his contract. Rookie WR's put up decent but inconsistant numbers. When i say a player needs to develop doesnt means i say that wont produce at all. Desean wasnt reliable and consistant.[/quote]

Desean showed flashes of brilliance last year, becoming only the second rookie to have 100 receiving yards in his first two games. Though he may have been slightly inconsistent, he did shine in the postseason, falling behind Curtis by only 4 yards. That is what I consider to be a good young player, they may be inconsistent, but that is due to inexperience. Once experienced, those "flashes" of greatness will become more regular.

[quote name='lowrider']You're not understanding that adding stuff to our offense isnt going to make our team drastically better. The development of our offensive line and Flacco will help our offense more than bringing in anyone to improve the offense. We had the youngest offensive line in the NFL last year with a rookie quarterback. Every year they are going to improve together. Unlike McNabb who is only going to get worse with one more years time. The stars of the Eagles are getting old and worse. When the Ravens stars are maturing (especially for Ray because he is immortal). The Ravens offense is only going to improve.[/quote]

Not necessarily, that "youngest O-line" was limited to Gaither, Grubbs, Brown, Yanda, and Terry. Then once Yanda was injured, we moved Terry inside, and replaced him with Anderson. That by itself increased the average age of the O-line. Now replace Brown with Birk, but Anderson with Oher, and that line is (redundantly) a year older. Granted those five O-linemen and Flacco will improve with time, but how many of those linemen will pull a Jason Brown and leave? So that "every year" bit may be limited to only a year as I know Gaither's contract expires end of the year. Oh, and if McNabb gets worse with age, so does Lewis. The human body is truly amazing, but age does take it's toll, and one could point out that McNabb is younger than Ray and still has more of his physical prime. However, losing one's prime can often be masked due to experience, you start to play more with your improving mind as opposed to your physically deteriorating body. But, I'd love to meet the person who would argue the position of QB is less mental than the the position of MLB. McNabb has proven to be a very smart QB, the one with the best TD:INT ratio in NFL history, and IMO that should garner him mention in the NFL Hall of Fame. All this aside, I wouldn't be surprised if charm city and the city of brotherly love meet in Superbowl 44. But as of right now, I would be surprised to see Philly do worse than Baltimore, not included strength of schedule.

[lowrider]

[quote name='CustomUserName' post='195104' date='May 26 2009, 09:00 AM']Yes, and the week before Philly tied with the Bengals, so by your logic the Bengals could have made the NFC championship game, I mean ties just don't happen. Dude, the Eagles were in a slump when we beat them, it's not who you play but when you play them. I am a Ravens fan since they drafted Ray Lewis, and I have to admit that the Eagles as of right now on paper are the best team in the NFL.


Desean showed flashes of brilliance last year, becoming only the second rookie to have 100 receiving yards in his first two games. Though he may have been slightly inconsistent, he did shine in the postseason, falling behind Curtis by only 4 yards. That is what I consider to be a good young player, they may be inconsistent, but that is due to inexperience. Once experienced, those "flashes" of greatness will become more regular.



Not necessarily, that "youngest O-line" was limited to Gaither, Grubbs, Brown, Yanda, and Terry. Then once Yanda was injured, we moved Terry inside, and replaced him with Anderson. That by itself increased the average age of the O-line. Now replace Brown with Birk, but Anderson with Oher, and that line is (redundantly) a year older. Granted those five O-linemen and Flacco will improve with time, but how many of those linemen will pull a Jason Brown and leave? So that "every year" bit may be limited to only a year as I know Gaither's contract expires end of the year. Oh, and if McNabb gets worse with age, so does Lewis. The human body is truly amazing, but age does take it's toll, and one could point out that McNabb is younger than Ray and still has more of his physical prime. However, losing one's prime can often be masked due to experience, you start to play more with your improving mind as opposed to your physically deteriorating body. But, I'd love to meet the person who would argue the position of QB is less mental than the the position of MLB. McNabb has proven to be a very smart QB, the one with the best TD:INT ratio in NFL history, and IMO that should garner him mention in the NFL Hall of Fame. All this aside, I wouldn't be surprised if charm city and the city of brotherly love meet in Superbowl 44. But as of right now, I would be surprised to see Philly do worse than Baltimore, not included strength of schedule.[/quote]

How else do you compare teams if you dont use head to head matchups? I know they were in a slump but doesnt that prove a point that Eagles are not the best team in the NFL? They are inconsistant. And i've heard the arguement that Eagles beat the Giants thats why they are better than the Giants but the Giants were on a slump so you cant count that game.

Desean should flashes until he dropped the ball on the goalline. Desean will be good but lets think about think. Why would McNabb complain about the offense not having enough weapons? Because he wasnt happy with the offense and they were weak at least at reciever. Which is why the Eagles needed Maclin.

We had statiscally the youngest offensive line in the league. Everyteam has injuries and everyteam loses players to free agency. But that still doesnt take away from the drastic improve that is going to happen in one year for those young players.

I feel like TD-int ratio is completely useless. So McNabb run up the score on the little guy. Maybe his ratio wouldnt be so high if they didnt take him out against the Ravens

McNabb has been injured a lot over the years. The way he played he took a lot of blows. Different from Ray because he delievered the blows. We are going to see the effects soon. Ray isnt what he used to be but he does much more than his ability to play. I think the Eagles looked towards Dawkins for leadership more than McNabb. Now they dont have Dawkins.

The Eagles are not the best in NFL. I would put the Giants, Patriots, Ravens, and Steelers in front of them. Giants are going to it back on track after a "slump" with Plax going crazy. Patriots went 11-5 without the MVP. Steelers are superbowl champs. The Eagles and Ravens both have had good offseasons but the Eagles havent done anything to pass the Ravens.

[jezzy]

i think the pats are going to struggle for the first couple of weeks so i dont see how everyone puts them first cuz on paper they look really good but we all know the game aint played on paper so i think the steelers should be 1st then the cards, giants,ravens,patriots.from there its a toss up but i think there going to be the best teams.

[pick-ups]

[quote name='lowrider' post='195115' date='May 26 2009, 08:17 AM']How else do you compare teams if you dont use head to head matchups? I know they were in a slump but doesnt that prove a point that Eagles are not the best team in the NFL? They are inconsistant.[b] And i've heard the arguement that Eagles beat the Giants thats why they are better than the Giants but the Giants were on a slump so you cant count that game.[/b]

Desean should flashes until he dropped the ball on the goalline. Desean will be good but lets think about think. Why would McNabb complain about the offense not having enough weapons? Because he wasnt happy with the offense and they were weak at least at reciever. Which is why the Eagles needed Maclin.

We had statiscally the youngest offensive line in the league. Everyteam has injuries and everyteam loses players to free agency. But that still doesnt take away from the drastic improve that is going to happen in one year for those young players.

I feel like TD-int ratio is completely useless. So McNabb run up the score on the little guy. Maybe his ratio wouldnt be so high if they didnt take him out against the Ravens

McNabb has been injured a lot over the years. The way he played he took a lot of blows. Different from Ray because he delievered the blows. We are going to see the effects soon. Ray isnt what he used to be but he does much more than his ability to play. I think the Eagles looked towards Dawkins for leadership more than McNabb. Now they dont have Dawkins.

The Eagles are not the best in NFL. I would put the Giants, Patriots, Ravens, and Steelers in front of them. Giants are going to it back on track after a "slump" with Plax going crazy. Patriots went 11-5 without the MVP. Steelers are superbowl champs. The Eagles and Ravens both have had good offseasons but the Eagles havent done anything to pass the Ravens.[/quote]
That wasn't just one game,but in fact 2 games at the Meadowlands(only 2 losses of the year there)and in the same fashion(no offensive TDs/outside of 1 garbage time one).
No sacks for that fierce pass rush in 3 games.
Just as the Steelers had the Ravens number the Eagles had the Giants.
Once might be luck,but twice in the same dominant fashion is proof.
It may not mean much(like your opinion)but most pundits/prognosticators already have the Eagles better than the Ravens,so its not just me.

[CustomUserName]

[quote name='lowrider' post='195115' date='May 26 2009, 11:17 AM']How else do you compare teams if you dont use head to head matchups? I know they were in a slump but doesnt that prove a point that Eagles are not the best team in the NFL? They are inconsistant. And i've heard the arguement that Eagles beat the Giants thats why they are better than the Giants but the Giants were on a slump so you cant count that game. [/quote]

Yeah, a head-to-head match up is a great comparison, if both teams are on hot streaks, but if one is in a rut, I don't see how it is fair to compare team A at their best to team B at their worst. Remember at the beginning of last year when NYG started 0-2? I remember saying "I hope they don't expect Eli to win it for them." But they got on a hot streak that carried into the opening half of last season.

[quote name='lowrider' post='195115' date='May 26 2009, 11:17 AM']Desean should flashes until he dropped the ball on the goalline. [b]Desean will be good[/b] but lets think about think. Why would McNabb complain about the offense not having enough weapons? Because he wasnt happy with the offense and they[n] were weak at least at reciever. Which is why the Eagles needed [b]Maclin[/b].[/quote]

So having a big playmaker in Desean and drafting another huge playmaker in Maclin isn't the answer to the offense. What about Stacy and Peters? Who did we get for receiver? Oh yeah, Kelley Washington. Philly and Baltimore have a similar line, similar backfield, but the passing game is clearly in Philly's favor.

[quote name='lowrider' post='195115' date='May 26 2009, 11:17 AM']We had statiscally the youngest offensive line in the league. Everyteam has injuries and everyteam loses players to free agency. But that still doesnt take away from the drastic improve that is going to happen in one year for those young players.[/quote]

But again that youngest line is found using Enron math. The line was limited to the five players I gave you, and Yanda got injured against the colts. We then replaced him with Anderson who was about a decade older (equating to that average increasing by two years). Then in offseason we lost Brown in favor or Birk and Anderson in favor of Oher, no difference. The players will improve, but you are too optimistic to continue using this faulty math (cause the average age of our line now is 26, which among the league is average), and then you assume that young stars like Yanda and Gaither wouldn't test the Free Agency. We can barely predict what will happen this year, let alone over the course of the next two or three when those two hit the Free agency, along with many others.

[quote name='lowrider' post='195115' date='May 26 2009, 11:17 AM']I feel like TD-int ratio is completely useless. So McNabb run up the score on the little guy. Maybe his ratio wouldnt be so high if they didnt take him out against the Ravens[/quote]

McNabb played every team in the NFL, at least twice. He is least intercepted QB in NFL history. If he had a ring on his finger, he'd be a shoe in for the Hall of Fame. That ratio won't get him to the playoffs, but neither will Flacco's two playoff wins, or Ray Lewis' two DPoY awards. And if you think a pick or two in that game would have hurt McNabb's ratio, you're fooling yourself.

[quote name='lowrider' post='195115' date='May 26 2009, 11:17 AM']McNabb has been injured a lot over the years. The way he played he took a lot of blows. Different from Ray because he delievered the blows. We are going to see the effects soon. Ray isnt what he used to be but he does much more than his ability to play. I[b] think[/b] the Eagles looked towards Dawkins for leadership more than McNabb. Now they dont have Dawkins.[/quote]

Delivering and taking blows? How many hits has Peyton took? Should we assume then that Lewis is better than Manning? That logic is complete non sequitur. There is no difference between giving and taking hits, force is force. Otherwise Collins would have hurt his arm and not Suggs in the divisional round. I won't even respond to the leadership statement.

[quote name='lowrider' post='195115' date='May 26 2009, 11:17 AM']The Eagles are not the best in NFL. I would put the Giants, Patriots, Ravens, and Steelers in front of them. Giants are going to it back on track after a "slump" with Plax going crazy. Patriots went 11-5 without the MVP. Steelers are superbowl champs. The Eagles and Ravens both have had good offseasons but the Eagles havent done anything to pass the Ravens.[/quote]

Giants- imploded after Plax, failed in december (miserably), lost their swagger, lost their three headed monster, all they got going for them is Osi coming back.
Pats- Brady tore two ligaments in his leg. Yeah, he'll just return like nothing happened.
Ravens- We still lack the passing game that the Eagles have, and a little thing called pass-rush
Steelers- Like I said, got lucky. They were a good team that got very lucky and didn't have to play great teams in the post season or those great teams were too injury plagued to star players.

Indy and SD are the only ones I'd hold up in the same tier as Philly.

[Alexir]

Mark my words. EAGLES WILL NOT WIN A SINGLE PLAYOFF GAME THIS YEAR. I Doubt they will even go to the playoffs but they will definitely not win a playoff game.

[MagicianCamille]

Wow ESPN ranked them higher than the Ravens, no NFC East bias there.

At least they didn't give the Falcons some ridiculous ranking though like I expected them to.

[pick-ups]

[quote name='Alexir' post='195142' date='May 26 2009, 10:20 AM']Mark my words. EAGLES WILL NOT WIN A SINGLE PLAYOFF GAME THIS YEAR. I Doubt they will even go to the playoffs but they will definitely not win a playoff game.[/quote]
Really?
The same Eagles led by McNabb that has never gone one and done under Reid.....ok

[darklight1216]

[quote name='Alexir' post='195142' date='May 26 2009, 01:20 PM']Mark my words. EAGLES WILL NOT WIN A SINGLE PLAYOFF GAME THIS YEAR. I Doubt they will even go to the playoffs but they will definitely not win a playoff game.[/quote]
And the Cowboys will face the Bengals in the Superbowl.

[Nevermore52]

[quote name='darklight1216' post='195148' date='May 26 2009, 01:36 PM']And the Cowboys will face the Bengals in the Superbowl.[/quote]

Battle of two of the most overhyped QB's in history!