Are the Saints the Best Team in Football?

[BlaqOptic]

Just now, BLick12 said:

Does the NFL using something "literally dumb" to make a decision really seem that outlandish?  

Alright, that's a fair counterpoint. I made a bad argument to make a valid point.

Strength of Schedule is far from a "literally dumb" argument or whatever Phire says. IIRC (and chances are I don't), there are about only two teams in the past 20 years IIRC with an easy SoS who won it all; the 2009 Saints and the 2014(or 15 don't remember) Patriots. That said, the Eagles remind me a lot of the 2009 Saints. Where everything just seems to line up for them much in the way it did for the Saints. Wouldn't be surprised if they come out of the NFC easily. Also wouldn't be surprised if they got upset in the Divisional Round.

Long story short: Some stats say Eagles going to the Super Bowl. Some stats say Eagles lose in Division. Moral? Stats show nothing. Super Bowls are won in February. Who cares what I'm even saying right now.

[RuralBill]

24 minutes ago, Breesus mode said:

Nice strawman

Strawman for what? You're not using that word correctly as I'm not even arguing anything lmao!

[Breesus mode]

1 minute ago, RuralBill said:

Strawman for what? You're not using that word correctly as I'm not even arguing anything lmao!

Then you don't understand how an argument works. Go ahead and find one Saints fan that has said this:

Quote

No. We can't move the Saints from #1 until every single player of theirs is 100% healthy and then lose. 

It was a strawman

[El Ramster]

45 minutes ago, BlaqOptic said:

Supposed to and did are not the same thing... The true SoS is not last year's because what happened last year has absolutely no baring on this year other than 2 games each team plays. The reality is the Eagles have the easiest SoS amongst all post-season contenders.

Can one argue that the Eagles are blowing out teams so it doesn't matter? Certainly.

However, to sit here and pretend that SoS isn't a valid argument against the Eagles is ridiculous as teams with easy SoS have traditionally faltered in the post-season regardless of seed. Who knows what the Eagles do come the post-season but let's not pretend that they, like any other division leader, don't have questions. Maybe less than others, but that SoS has to be a question.

Dude yes.. Salud! Eagles fans after beating the bears. 

[CriminalMind]

Strength of schedule /Strength of Victory is not literally dumb ... its factored into NCAA coaches poll, NCAA Basketball RPI too

[RuralBill]

26 minutes ago, Breesus mode said:

Then you don't understand how an argument works. Go ahead and find one Saints fan that has said this:

It was a strawman

Can someone send this guy a dictionary? Again, not debating where Saints should be ranked. Not even debating anything. So complain more as I don't care what you do, but stop using the word strawman where it obviously doesn't fit. 

 

 

I'm just impersonating some Saints fans who are constantly making excuses because it's getting incredibly annoying, and judging by other posts in here, I speak for the majority of NFL fans. I mean, your most recent gamedayy thread is literally titled "No Excuses Edition," because of all the injury excuses.

 

And some Saints fans quotes:

In response to a Redskins fan in aprons to claims they played better in their H2H, 

Quote

You (Redskins fan in response to playing better in their H2H) are also basing this off a game in which we were missing 4 defensive starters. In other words, not our real defense as over a third of our guys were out and all but Okafor will be back soon.

 

Saints fan replying to someone wanting to move the Saints down in the rankings after they lost yesterday. 

Quote

I don't understand what you're arguing? Why wouldn't you judge a team at its best? Its different when guys are on IR (Bradford, Okafor) but you can obviously assume the Saints team will be much better with a healthy Terron Armstead, AJ Klein, Kenny Vaccaro, Marcus Lattimore and Ken Crawley...

 

Same.

Quote

First of all, not “every team” has lost a DPOY candidate and top 3 CB (and Crawley who is good in his own regard as well) going against the best offense they’ve faced so far. So you can go ahead and drop that narrative. It’s no excuse because you need depth to compete in the NFL but ignoring it completely doesn’t make any sense either.

 

Same.

Quote

What other team was missing both starting CBs, starting DE, starting SS and starting MLB?

 

Saints fan in a bickering war with a Vikings fan over whether the Saints roster has more significant injuries. (Pretty funny because I haven't heard the Vikings actually complain/make excuses about any of their injuries this year).

Quote

S, DE, RT, LT, LB, CB, CB, C,  and I'm sure I'm missing some more.  The argument isn't that teams dont' have injuries and depth matters, but missing players for a game or two, vs IR do matter.  A team that loses a game but still performs while missing major pieces that will be back sooner rather than later should have injuries taken into account as teams with their starting players in the line-up perform better, so when they return their team will be better, players on IR won't be back and shouldn't be taken into account.  So the Saints lost today missing their top 2 CBs and that should be taken into account as it's not reflective of the team's true strength

 

[MookieMonstah]

I'm not a Saints fan. I'm a Patriots fan. The second and forth quote are both me.

[RuralBill]

2 minutes ago, MookieMonster said:

I'm not a Saints fan. I'm a Patriots fan. The second and forth quote are both me.

All of the posts on your recent post page (besides on "just now") are about the Saints, some being in the Saints game day thread. Are they your second team?

[MookieMonstah]

Just now, RuralBill said:

All of the posts on your recent post page (besides on "just now") are about the Saints, some being in the Saints game day thread. Are they your second team?

Born in New Orleans and my dads a huge Saints fan, so I just see them a lot. I guess you could consider them my second team, if the Patriots were banned from the NFL for some reason I'd certainly become a Saints fan.

[Raves]

1 hour ago, RuralBill said:

I'm with you. Just impersonating some Saints fans.

Actually Saints fans only point out the injury when people make the false comparison of things like common opponents and how they have performed against them compared to the Saints.  For example how the Vikings played the Rams who had their non-IR healthy important players going forward so it is not a fair comparison to compare the Vikings game against the Rams to the Saints games against the Rams when the Saints were missing 2 integral players who will be back in the near future, had they both been put on IR then this argument wouldn't hold weight as you can't actually consider them a part of the Saints strength. 

Also most Saints fans have agreed they aren't the #1 team, they have/had a case for it, but really feel the top 5-6 teams are all very fluid and at this point the games are pretty much a coin flip situation.  We have actually been responding not that the Saints are the bes team, but to counter the horrible arguments some are making, so could you please start actually posting something to add to the conversation and not just trash.

[tyler735]

1 minute ago, Raves said:

Actually Saints fans only point out the injury when people make the false comparison of things like common opponents and how they have performed against them compared to the Saints.  For example how the Vikings played the Rams who had their non-IR healthy important players going forward so it is not a fair comparison to compare the Vikings game against the Rams to the Saints games against the Rams when the Saints were missing 2 integral players who will be back in the near future, had they both been put on IR then this argument wouldn't hold weight as you can't actually consider them a part of the Saints strength. 

Also most Saints fans have agreed they aren't the #1 team, they have/had a case for it, but really feel the top 5-6 teams are all very fluid and at this point the games are pretty much a coin flip situation.  We have actually been responding not that the Saints are the bes team, but to counter the horrible arguments some are making, so could you please start actually posting something to add to the conversation and not just trash.

Stop making logical points. Obviously all of us Saints fans are saying we are the greatest team ever and would be undefeated winning 50-0 every week had our players not been injured. We are clearly the same team without Lattimore, Vaccaro, Crawley, Klein, and Okafor. That is a fact and isn't up for debate. Injuries don't ever effect the outcome of the game. I don't get why us Saints fans would ever think otherwise. It seems like the Packers are doing just fine without Rodgers in the lineup, and there has been no difference in production on offense in his absence.

[BLick12]

56 minutes ago, BlaqOptic said:

Alright, that's a fair counterpoint. I made a bad argument to make a valid point.

Strength of Schedule is far from a "literally dumb" argument or whatever Phire says. IIRC (and chances are I don't), there are about only two teams in the past 20 years IIRC with an easy SoS who won it all; the 2009 Saints and the 2014(or 15 don't remember) Patriots. That said, the Eagles remind me a lot of the 2009 Saints. Where everything just seems to line up for them much in the way it did for the Saints. Wouldn't be surprised if they come out of the NFC easily. Also wouldn't be surprised if they got upset in the Divisional Round.

Long story short: Some stats say Eagles going to the Super Bowl. Some stats say Eagles lose in Division. Moral? Stats show nothing. Super Bowls are won in February. Who cares what I'm even saying right now.

I would agree. The Eagles have also benefited going into a lot of games playing against teams with injuries and suspensions at opportune times.  However, I still feel like they are the most proven team in the NFL to this point.  I'd be less sold on them if they weren't blowing each team out and looking strong on both sides of the ball.  Normally, most teams slip up a game or two even against less stellar competition. The Eagles have been absolutely steam rolling everyone.  

[Dome]

31 minutes ago, RuralBill said:

Saints fan replying to someone wanting to move the Saints down in the rankings after they lost yesterday. 

Quote

so you quote me explaining why the Saints injuries are no excuse, and say that’s me giving an excuse? Did you even read my quote?

Also, you say I’m arguing because I don’t think the Saints should fall in the rankings, but ignore me saying I’d put them at #6 or #7 after the close Redskins win and loss to the rams.

Youre cherrypicking your arguments, or flat out making them up 

[Raves]

8 minutes ago, BLick12 said:

I would agree. The Eagles have also benefited going into a lot of games playing against teams with injuries and suspensions at opportune times.  However, I still feel like they are the most proven team in the NFL to this point.  I'd be less sold on them if they weren't blowing each team out and looking strong on both sides of the ball.  Normally, most teams slip up a game or two even against less stellar competition. The Eagles have been absolutely steam rolling everyone.  

I think that's one of the things everyone has to take into consideration when looking at various arguments.  The Eagles for example have a very definite question mark about their schedule, at the same time they are blowing out pretty much every team that they should be blowing out, which is what you would expect a great team to do, though even teams that you think might be great can end up being exposed when playing against opponents of similar strength, so without a sample size of those types of games as well to see how they react in those games, then it makes it hard to accurately gauge their true strength, though it is obviously high based on what we can obvserve from both sides of the arguments.

[Raves]

@domepatrol91 @RuralBill and my argument about the Saints missing all those players, the last argument, was in direct reference to a Vikings fan arguing injuries, specifically to counter their argument about injuries and when we were discussing the Rams game specifically about how each team faced them compared to what is their expected 100% roster, aka non-IR players.