tOfficial "Tom Brady & the New England Patriots" Superthread

[cerealboi]

Because I think it's pretty stupid to claim the AFC East hasn't been very good the last 3 years. Patriots fans are taking it like a slight, but it's really not. No one is saying they suck, just the division does.

Plus I've got time to kill at work and I like a good argument. That honest enough for you?

Just stop. You're wrong. Here are the numbers for records against other divisions

AFC East

2013: 14-10

2012: 13-11

2011: 13-11

2010: 15-9

Total 55 - 41


AFC West

2013: 14 - 10

2012: 9 - 15

2011: 11-13

2010: 10 - 14

Total 44 - 52


AFC North

2013: 11 - 13

2012: 13 - 11

2011: 15 - 9

2010: 12 - 12

Total 51 - 45



AFC South

2013: 9 - 15

2012: 13 - 11

2011: 9 - 15

2010: 11 - 13

Total 42 - 54


Accordingly, the AFC East teams collectively have the best record against the other divisions. AFC South is the weakest division. Sorry.

 

[cerealboi]

And finally, to pound this fallacy in the dirt, if you look at the division record without the best team in the division you have the following:

AFC East: 35-37

AFC West: 29-43

AFC North: 35-37

AFC South: 26-46

 

[MrMoJoRisin63]

LOL at Brady. 0 TDs against the Colts

I figured there wouldn't be as much trolling here. ESPN was a trolls breeding ground. Well, now that I think about it; it was probably 3 or 4 people with tons of alternate accounts talking to each other.

I love how people ignored the dummy.


I'm proud of this board.

 

[JDM]

Thanks for doing that out. I've done it in the past over longer terms but didn't get around to it yet this time.

 

[Jakology]

I love how people ignored the dummy.


I'm proud of this board.

I'm just trying to have some lighthearted fun. I'm not being serious at all. I've said many times that I believe Brady is one of the GOATs. I was just posting this to remember the good ole ESPN days. Eh, who am I kidding? ESPN was a mess.

 

[Broncos6482]

Hey cerealboi, here's a question for you: if the AFC East is so good, why are they the only division in the NFL that only has 1 team over .500 for the past 3 seasons?

The Patriots are good. The rest of the division is not. Hasn't been since 2010.

 

[Broncos6482]

Why leave off the NFC? Why go back to 2010 when I've already acknowledged the AFC East was good that year?

See all of these other divisions have teams rise and fall. The AFC East has the Patriots (who are good) and a bunch of mediocre to bad teams for the last 3 years.

 

[packerzrule]

in spite of all the schtick, is there really any NFL fan that doesn't want to see another Manning vs Brady matchup??

 

[JDM]

Then how do they still have the best record ignoring the best team in each division that particular year?

 

[MrMoJoRisin63]

in spite of all the schtick, is there really any NFL fan that doesn't want to see another Manning vs Brady matchup??

Rivers and Luck?

 

[Broncos6482]

Then how do they still have the best record ignoring the best team in each division that particular year?

Because he included 2010 maybe (which I've said numerous times isn't relevant to the AFC East being poor)? Because he left off the NFC maybe? I don't know, I haven't done the breakdown. And technically they are tied with the AFC North, but I'd bet if you just go from 2011 on that wouldn't be the case.

 

[packerzrule]

Rivers and Luck?

touche

 

[Broncos6482]

Since 2011, the Patriots are the only team from the AFC East to finish a season with a winning record.

The AFC North has had 3 such teams (Steelers, Ravens, Bengals).
The AFC South has had 3 such teams (Texans, Colts, Titans).
The AFC West has had 3 such teams (Broncos, Chiefs, Chargers).
The NFC East has had 3 such teams (Redskins, Giants, Eagles).
The NFC North has had all 4 of their teams.
The NFC South has had 3 such teams (Falcons, Panthers, Saints).
The NFC West has had 3 such teams (Cardinals, Seahawks, 49ers).

What that tells me is that over those 3 years the Patriots have been incredibly consistent, and the rest of the division has been mediocre to poor compared to the rest of the league.

 

[cerealboi]

Hey cerealboi, here's a question for you: if the AFC East is so good, why are they the only division in the NFL that only has 1 team over .500 for the past 3 seasons?

The Patriots are good. The rest of the division is not. Hasn't been since 2010.

Probably because they 1) get pounded by the Pats (and recall the Pats also pounded teams outside the division so that's not really an indicator that the Jets, Bills, Phins are bad) and 2) They beat up on each other. For instance other than in 2010 when the Bills had only 4 wins, none of the AFC East teams have had less than 6 wins in the last four years. For most divisions there is one or even two "whipping boys", like, for example, the Raiders (4 wins) this year or the Chiefs last year (2 wins).

I also haven't looked at NFC games given that it's tough to judge since obviously each division only plays one other division from the other conference. In other words, the NFC East was pretty weak this year, and low and behold the AFC West went 11-5 against them. The AFC East didn't have that luxury.

We know why this claim is made - so people like you and hammer can say "Well if MY team was in the East, they'd be successful like the Pats because the Jets, Bills, and Phins are cupcakes." Fact is, it's simply not true, regardless of how many teams over .500 they have had. The numbers back it up.

 

[Broncos6482]

Another reason could be the interdivisional matchups from year to year. For example, in 2011 the AFC East played the AFC West. The AFC West was terrible that year, so the AFC East probably won a lot of those games. Doesn't mean the AFC East was suddenly a good division that season, it just means they were less awful than the AFC West was.

 

[sonnyblack65]

I dont undertstand this conference weak shit. Even if Pats win 6 games by default, which 2 of their losses came to Miami and Jets, they should get exposed to the other 10 teams. Now they get to playoffs by being division winnners, they should get croaked by real teams in playoffs. I believe this is the 3 AFCG in a row and 8th in Brady/BB era

 

[tshirt]

 

[sonnyblack65]

and you throw that the Jets went to 2 AFCG thats 10 AFCE teams in what 12 years

 

[Broncos6482]

Probably because they 1) get pounded by the Pats (and recall the Pats also pounded teams outside the division so that's not really an indicator that the Jets, Bills, Phins are bad) and 2) They beat up on each other. For instance other than in 2010 when the Bills had only 4 wins, none of the AFC East teams have had less than 6 wins in the last four years. For most divisions there is one or even two "whipping boys", like, for example, the Raiders (4 wins) this year or the Chiefs last year (2 wins).

Yes they beat up on each other because they aren't good. Does the rest of the AFC East beat up on the Patriots? Typically no, because the Patriots are good. The rest of the division is mediocre to bad, so they can beat each other up.

But perhaps calling it bad is an overstatement. Mediocre might have been a better term.

I also haven't looked at NFC games given that it's tough to judge since obviously each division only plays one other division from the other conference. In other words, the NFC East was pretty weak this year, and low and behold the AFC West went 11-5 against them. The AFC East didn't have that luxury.

But did the AFC West go 11-5 against the NFC East because the NFC East is bad, or because the AFC West is good? The Eagles went 1-3 against the AFC and 9-3 against everybody else. The Cowboys were 1-3 against the AFC West and 7-5 against everybody else. The Giants were 1-3 against the AFC West and 6-6 against everybody else. The Redskins sucked against everybody. But 3 of the 4 teams in that division were .500 or better when they weren't playing the AFC West, yet they were only 1-3 when they did play the West.

Besides this can be true within the conference as well. See my example of 2011 with the AFC East and AFC West.

We know why this claim is made - so people like you and hammer can say "Well if MY team was in the East, they'd be successful like the Pats because the Jets, Bills, and Phins are cupcakes." Fact is, it's simply not true, regardless of how many teams over .500 they have had. The numbers back it up.

That's not why I'm saying it. I look at the AFC East and say, "Over the last 3 years, 9 wins from the Patriots would have been enough to win that division. That isn't very good." Again, THIS DOES NOT TAKE AWAY FROM WHAT THE PATRIOTS HAVE ACCOMPLISHED. They've obviously been very consistent over that timeframe.

 

[cerealboi]

Because he included 2010 maybe (which I've said numerous times isn't relevant to the AFC East being poor)? Because he left off the NFC maybe? I don't know, I haven't done the breakdown. And technically they are tied with the AFC North, but I'd bet if you just go from 2011 on that wouldn't be the case.

Way to move the lines. However, using last three years, just like you wanted, AFC East STILL has the best record against the other divisions at 40-32. West 34-38, North 39-33, and South 31-41.

Take the last three years and take off the best teams record, and the AFC East comes in second at 25-29. West 23-31, North 27-27, South 19-35.

Contrary to what you're saying the AFC East is either the strongest or second strongest division in the AFC over the last three or four years. The fact that none of the other three has finished over .500 probably says more about the parity between those teams than their quality.