Jump to content

Rank Your Top 5 NFC Teams For 2018

stl4life07

By stl4life07
in NFL Comparisons

Recommended Posts

stl4life07

stl4life07

Posted
Posted

1. Eagles - They are the champs. Yes Wentz and Jeffery injuries are a big concern to even start to season even if they both play. I do think by the end of the season they will be at their best. I do also have concerns about how hard it will be to defend their title. The Pats went all out last offseason (remember no days off by Belichick?). They went out and traded for Cooks, Ealey, Allen, and signed Gilmore, Burkhead, and Gillislee. They struggled early on in the season. That’s with having a healthy Brady. So I feel right now I’m keeping the Eagles at the top until they get knocked off which is very possible this season.

2. Rams - They were one of the best teams in the NFC last season and they added All-Pro talent and is in another year under McVay/Wade. They already experienced the pressure that comes with success and they now understand the atmosphere of the postseason. Unlike every top tier caliber team in the NFC, the Rams division is the easiest. Not to mention a lot of the tough games for the Rams (Packers, Eagles, Vikings, Chargers) are at home. They could roll through their division, rack up enough wins to get them the top seed and earn them HFA throughout the playoffs. That could be a scary thing for the rest of the NFC to have to travel on the road with crowd noise and Suh, Donald, and Brockers causing chaos up front and Talib, Peters, and Joyner causing chaos in the back end. 

3. Vikings - They got their QB in Cousins who they are hoping can lead them to the Superbowl. They have gotten even better on defense and they are getting back Cook on offense. Cousins is an upgrade over Keenum but the reason why they aren’t higher is because Cousins seem to not show up big when the spotlight shines the brightest. Well the spotlight will be even brighter now that he is on a Superbowl contending team and the contract he signed.

4. Packers - Rodgers is back! He changes everything. It wouldn’t shock me if they won the NFCN over the Vikings. Add Graham to the mix the offense should be good even without Nelson because with Graham there still is Cobb and Adams and Montgomery with the emergence of Jones and Williams running the football. The defense improved too with the addition of Wilkerson. I expect the Packers to go into the draft add another impact player or two on defense as well.

5. Saints - I know many will think I’m crazy for having them this low. The reason I do is because I said this before and I’ll say it again. The Saints haven’t really made big splashes that we have seen the Eagles, Rams, Vikings, and Packers made. Yes the Saints tried to get Suh. Yes they tried to get Nelson. Yes they tried to get Graham. They even tried to sign Fuller to an offer sheet to hopefully pry him away from the Bears. All of those attempts failed. They know that just staying put while everyone is not could actually mean they lose ground. They are in the toughest division in the NFC where even the Bucs have gotten better. So they will be in a dog fight throughout the season. As great of a season they had last year the barely won the division. It wouldn’t shock me if the Falcons or Panthers end up winning the division and having a better season than the Saints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Forge

Forge

Posted
Posted

Iggles

Rams

Vikings

Saints

#5 is hard as it gets mighty murky. Rodgers and the Packers? Cam and the Panthers? Does Dallas come back? Can the Lions be more balanced? I find it hard to believe against Rodgers if he's healthy, but I think it's going to be several teams who finish pretty close together

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stl4life07

stl4life07

Posted
  • Author
Posted
15 minutes ago, MathMan said:

gut feel ;)

i think their young pieces are going to come together.

I liked what the Bears did too but if they end up being better than the Packers AND Vikings this season I’d be shocked. Could they be in the WC race later in the season? Yes, but with Rodgers back and the Vikings are at worst the same as last season and at best even better, I just don’t see the Bears being better than them. I’ll give you credit though for going out on a limb and if you are right, more props to you lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Malfatron

Malfatron

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

NFC North is going to be extremely tough next season. I'm higher on the Bears than most as well, but don't think they get in. But the winner of the division may only win like 10 games. 

 

i think the nfc west is better across the board

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Forge

Forge

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, MathMan said:

i think the nfc west is better across the board

Meh, I think the Rams are probably headed for 12-4, 13-3 type season, but the niners / seahawks / cards all seem more in that 6-8 win range (for the Cards, that would assume the health of Bradford). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raves

Raves

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, stl4life07 said:

 

5. Saints - I know many will think I’m crazy for having them this low. The reason I do is because I said this before and I’ll say it again. The Saints haven’t really made big splashes that we have seen the Eagles, Rams, Vikings, and Packers made. Yes the Saints tried to get Suh. Yes they tried to get Nelson. Yes they tried to get Graham. They even tried to sign Fuller to an offer sheet to hopefully pry him away from the Bears. All of those attempts failed. They know that just staying put while everyone is not could actually mean they lose ground. They are in the toughest division in the NFC where even the Bucs have gotten better. So they will be in a dog fight throughout the season. As great of a season they had last year the barely won the division. It wouldn’t shock me if the Falcons or Panthers end up winning the division and having a better season than the Saints.

Making big splashes doesn't always work out.  I mean look at the Redskins where for years all they did was sign players to huge contracts.  How did getting Suh help the Dolphins?  How about all the other years teams make big splashes in FA trying to get over the hump only to fall short.

In 2006, the Saints "splashy" move was drafting Reggie Bush at #2, they had like 50+% change-over from the year before and the guys they brought in were more journeyman/average starters than stars.  If you want to argue Brees was "splashy" then you're using hindsight.  At the time he was considered an average QB and most were sure if he would ever be able to fully recover from his shoulder injury.

You don't win by making big splashes, you win by bringing in players that fit your scheme and fill a need, not just big names.  The Saints best FA signings have typically been guys that went under the radar.

Brees-Obviously better than Brooks but no one knew if Brees would be able to really play again, also he was just average in San Diego.

Darren Sharper-At the time was thought to be on the downside of his career, ended up having a few huge seasons for the Saints.

Darren Sproles-Considered a good change of pace back but wasn't highly sought after.

John Goodwin-Very productive center for us that was just wasting away on the Jets, was part of our Super Bowl run.

Some of our worst signings have been our "big splashes."

Jarius Byrd-Big contract, ended up never really producing for the Saints due to injuries.

Keenan Lewis-Flashy CB signing for the Saints, ended up never working out for us due to injuries.

Brandon Browner-Another big flashy CB signing, dude got torched and was horrible for us.

 

Honestly the Saints do better with the solid guys that don't seem to be the biggest names but just play football.  The only times they've had success with "splashy" players has been through trades with guys like Max Unger, Jeremy Shockey, and Jon Vilma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stl4life07

stl4life07

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@MathMan Yeah I think I need to see more from the Niners before I crown them as a serious threat to the Rams. I do find it funny how the Rams upgraded on their already 11-5 team and a lot are questioning if it will make the team worst BUT the Niners are still unproven in games that matter and people are crownin them as the team that makes the playoffs and challenge the Rams for division.

If the Seahawks could have a similar draft like the Saints had last year, they could get things back on track. The only probably is it’s hard to have to type of draft the Saints had. They hit on ALOT of picks in HUGE ways. They had a lot of luck to With Lattimore and Ramszyc falling then stealing Kamara and they traded up even to get him.

Ill tell you a team to watch and that’s the Cards only IF Bradford can stay healthy even for at least 10-12 games. They could be the true team to test the Rams somewhat in the division. Overall though the Rams should win the NFCW by at least 3 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HTTRDynasty

HTTRDynasty

Posted
Posted

It's hard to predict at this point.  The draft will be big for teams fighting over the playoff spots from 4-6.  A team like the Redskins (speaking on a roster I know best), for example, can sign Hankins (huge in fixing the run defense, along with Jonathan Allen coming back healthy), draft Guice in a trade-back in the first round to acquire extra picks, and take an OG in round 2, and the team would look pretty good to fight it out for a wildcard spot as long as they have better luck with health than they did last year.  Obviously, a lot would have to go right for this to happen, but transformations like that are almost expected in the NFL nowadays... just look at the Saints last year.  At least one surprise team will make it.

When it comes to the Big 3 - Eagles, Vikings, and Rams - all of them have some pretty big question marks.  Though they're still the favorites to be the top 3 seeds IMO, that can easily change if these questions aren't answered.

1. Eagles - How will Wentz look when he returns?  What if he isn't the same after that injury?  Do you keep playing him to let him get his legs back under him?  What if you are 2-4 going into your bye and it's obvious that sticking with Wentz can cost you your playoff hopes?  Do you play Foles?  Foles lit the world on fire for his last couple playoff games, but he was pretty pedestrian before that IIRC.  Do you hand the team over to him in that situation?

2. Vikings - How will Cousins look his first year outside of Gruden's system?  A system he's been in since 2014.  Will it take him a lot of time to adjust to a new scheme?  Can he be the same player he was even once he does adjust?  How does Cook look coming back from that devastating injury?  Is he still the same player he was last year?  You lost McKinnon, so you have to rely on Murray if Cook doesn't look right.  How much does that hurt your team?

3. Rams - This one is pretty obvious.  How are all these new pieces going to gel?  Beyond the obvious (new players learning a new system, learning to play with each other, etc.), there's also the fact that when you have a bunch of guys playing on one year contracts, playing for LTDs, at what point do they stop "doing their jobs" and start trying to make plays outside of their roles in order to make sure they get PAID next season?  Is Suh going to be happy occupying blocks so Donald can feast and rack up sacks and TFL's (I know they will both be one-gapping, but at some point someone is probably going to need to occupy blockers in the run game in 3rd and short situations).  Is Peters going to keep playing his responsibilities instead of free-wheeling and looking for INTs if he only has 1 INT by week 8 this season and Talib has 5?  I could go on and on, but I think I made my point.  Then there's the obligatory, can Goff repeat his sophomore year success or will he regress?

There are no locks here for any team in the NFC, even when ignoring the role that new injuries could play.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...