Jump to content


Veteran Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

182 Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

291 profile views
  1. Jags sign Moncrief WR

    A couple more details: one year, $9.6m guaranteed, potential to go to $11.6m with incentives. Crazy.
  2. Grant played all 16 games for 4 years, was never on the injury report for an ankle injury, and looked fine and injury-free in the last game/play of the season, which Schefter cited as the source of the injury. Then once deal is nulled, Crabtree visits the Ravens. Obviously all those things are speculative, but they're not nothing. Still doesn't mean the Ravens violated anything, though. It just looks shady, that's all.
  3. Danny amendola to dolphins

    That sucks. Good luck Danny
  4. Browns trade Danny Shelton to the Patriots

    Appreciate the analysis from Browns fans, as I havent watched Shelton. People are often obsessed with who won a trade, but this looks like it might be one where both teams benefit. Browns move up the draft chart a bit, and Patriots get a 2-gapper that's a better fit in their run D.
  5. The dumb argument regarding Brady vs Montana

    You just listed Cincy as a competitor, which hasnt won a playoff game since 2001, but argued that you could say the Jets were only competitors for one year even though they've won 6 playoff games and made the AFCC twice in that time. I'm not going to go team by team, but that exemplifies the kind of bias that some people have against the AFC East. Cincy has been no more a competitor in this league since 2001 than Buffalo or Miami. No one has thought they were a legit contender for anything. Also, if the Steelers play down to their opponent, then it means theyre not as good. That's an argument against, not for, the strength of that division. Wins and losses matter. I dont think the AFC East has been some ridiculously great division. Not at all. Just that theyve been about as mediocre as most divisions, with teams having few chances to do damage not because theyre horrible as much as because theyre in the Patriots' division. Switch the Patriots with the Colts, for example, and I'd argue that the AFC South would look even more pathetic than it has. Same goes for most divisions - switch the Patriots for their best team, and the division as a whole would look weaker from 2001-present.
  6. The dumb argument regarding Brady vs Montana

    No, I dont think that. You just refuse to acknowledge any evidence that Buffalo, Miami and NYJ arent as bad as you want to believe. See my latest post before this one, in which the sample size is about 510 games for each bullet point. Buffalo, Miami and NYJ havent been that good since 2001, but neither have the 2-4 teams in every other division. I've provided evidence with significant sample sizes to support that position, while you have replied with attacks and excuses. Oh well.
  7. The dumb argument regarding Brady vs Montana

    You say division games are tougher. Then why have Indy and Denver done better, and Pittsburgh done just slightly worse, in their division games compared to vs. BUF/MIA/NYJ, three teams that supposedly make the AFC East so weak? I grant you Buffalo and Miami regarding SB threat, but that's not unusual in any division. When has Cincinnati, Cleveland, Jacksonville, Houston, Tennessee, KC or SD ever been considered a legit SB contender since 2001? Very rarely, if ever. Certainly not more than the Jets, who have made it to two AFCCs in that period. Really the only regular SB threats in the AFC since 2001 have been the Ravens or a team with Brady, Roethlisberger or Manning. 15 of the 17 SBs since 2001 have had Brady, Roesthlisberger or Manning playing. Maybe the real argument should be not that the AFC East in particular has been weak, but that the entire AFC has been top-heavy since 2001. -- Here are some other facts. Win percentages since 2001 against each AFC divisions' 2-4 teams by all teams outside their division (each bullet point represents about 510 games): vs. TEN/JAC/HOU: 56.1% vs. KC/OAK/LAC: 53.5% vs. BAL/CIN/CLE: 53.0% vs. BUF/MIA/NYJ: 52.5% :shrugs:
  8. The dumb argument regarding Brady vs Montana

    I gave a bevy of statistics to support my argument. You ignored almost all of them, but cherry picked one to attack and call my use of statistics dishonest. That in itself is dishonest. To your poi t, Cleveland and Cincinnati also have 0 playoff wins since 2001, and KC has 1. What about the fact that Denver, Indy and Pittsburgh have all done worse or marginally better against NYJ/BUF/MIA, which many argue are so bad, than in their own divisions against supposedly better teams?
  9. Is Drew Brees a Top 10 QB of all time?

    He is the poster child for the truism that wins are a team stat, and is the most underrated QB in my lifetime. If football ended today, I'd probably put him behind only Brady in ranking QBs of this century, and not that far behind.
  10. The dumb argument regarding Brady vs Montana

    double post
  11. The dumb argument regarding Brady vs Montana

    To your point about "it's divisional games, upsets happen." Consider these facts: The Steelers, Colts and Broncos have the best overall records in their respective divisions from 2001-2017. Given your theory that the AFC East has been weak and "it's divisional games, upsets happen," you would think that the Colts, Broncos and Steelers would all have a much easier time playing the supposedly weak Bills, Dolphins and Jets than they would playing in their own division. And yet in that time: The Colts have a 72% win percentage in their own division, but a 56% win percentage against Buffalo, Miami, and the Jets. If the AFC East has been as weak as people claim, why have the Colts done so much worse against BUF/MIA/NYJ than in their own division? The Broncos have a 59% win percentage in their own division, but a 55% win percentage against Buffalo, Miami and the Jets. If the AFC East has been as weak as people claim, why have the Broncos done worse against BUF/MIA/NYJ than in their own division? The Steelers have a 71% win percentage in their own division, and a slightly better 73% win percentage against Buffalo, Miami and the Jets. If the AFC East has been as weak as people claim, why have the Steelers barely done better against BUF/MIA/NYJ than in their own division? A couple other facts to your point about other AFC East teams not being remotely competitive. Since 2001: NYJ/MIA/BUF has been in 2 conference championships. BAL/CIN/CLE have been in 3, SD/KC/OAK have been in 2, and TEN/HOU/JAC have been in 2. If the AFC East is as weak as people claim, why are these numbers so close? NYJ/MIA/BUF have a 38% win percentage in the playoffs. Meanwhile, TEN/HOU/JAC/BAL/CIN/CLE/SD/KC/OAK have a 39% win percentage in the playoffs. If the AFC East is as weak as people claim, why are these number practically equivalent? Given these facts, it's logical to conclude that the real reason the AFC East is seen as weak is because the Patriots have been in it. If the Patriots had switched to another division in 2001, there's a high probability that they would have dominated that division and people would be calling that division weak.
  12. The dumb argument regarding Brady vs Montana

    The 2-4 teams in most divisions from 2001-present are what you've described regarding the Dolphins, Jets and Bills. Middling to bad. The fact is that the Patriots have done better against several other divisions (games that include playing a harder schedule because theyre playing all four teams in that division) than against the 2-4 teams in their own division. There is a narrative in this thread that the Patriots have done as well as they have in part because theyve been in the AFC East and not a harder division like the AFC North. But consider this: The Patriots have a 77.5% win percentage vs. Miami, Buffalo and NYJ since 2001; they have a 76.9% win percentage against Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Cincinnati. So the more reasonable hypothetical is that if NE had swapped places with Cleveland in 2001, everyone here would be writing about how weak the AFC North is.
  13. The dumb argument regarding Brady vs Montana

    Since 2001, I'd agree that the NFC North has been one of the better divisions. But calling the AFC East a cupcake division isn't true. Here are some facts from PFR. Since 2001: MIA/BUF/NYJ have a win percentage of 22.5% against the Patriots. The rest of the league has a win% of 23.5%. NE has a win% of 77.9% against the AFC East. NE has a win% of (from best to worst) 87.5% against the NFC North, 81.3% against the NFC East, 80.6% against the AFC North, 80.6% against the AFC South, 75% against the NFC West, 75% against the NFC South, and 63.9% against the AFC West. Given these facts, I think it's safe to say that the Patriots would have been a dominant team no matter what division they were in except, arguably, the AFC West.