Who will be the team of the 2010 decade? - Part 2

[Rock Strongo]

Couldnt agree more, this whole seamless transition talk is ridiculous. What has it happened a handful of times in history?

its happened here twice

bledsoe goes down...the rest is history
brady goes down, the team wins 11 games with a guy who held a clipboard under brady and belichick.

the common theme?

coach/system

 

[JMR]

it only seems to be leaky anus seattle fans who jump on this.

So outside of the bathroom jokes, it doesn't seem like you have much here.

 

[cerealboi]

Yup. And since 2008, no team in the division has managed to win 10 games or more other than the Patriots. Good argument, brah.

Are you saying the AFC East, outside the Pats, is weak?

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Are you saying the AFC East, outside the Pats, is weak?

Jumping in here to say, well ....yeah. Nobody has been able to rise up and take the division from the Pats in what seems like forever, or make a mark in the playoffs that is memorial. So I think it's fair to say the rest of the division sucks.

 

[CelticPride89]

Or the pats have just been able to remain a powerhouse for...what seems like forever. Just sayin. The rest of the division has been relatively weak most years admittedly. I have to say I do not agree that the transition from brady to our next qb will be seamless. Far from it, Tom will be greatly missed, however I do have a lot of faith in our organization. Wouldnt be surprised to see us remain successful post-Tom Brady.

 

[cerealboi]

Jumping in here to say, well ....yeah. Nobody has been able to rise up and take the division from the Pats in what seems like forever, or make a mark in the playoffs that is memorial. So I think it's fair to say the rest of the division sucks.

Or.... the Pats are just a juggernaut?

 

[cerealboi]

Since 2010 - the following are the AFC division records against teams in the other three AFC divisions.


AFC East: 67-53

AFC North: 65-55

AFC West: 57-63

AFC South: 51-69



Interestingly enough, the AFC East has the best extra-divisional record over the last 5 years.

Since 2010, here are the extra-divisional records, EXCLUDING the best team in each division for the given year just in case one was inclined to believe the Pats skew the record. e.g. The Pats W/L is taken out for each of the five years while the Steelers is taken out for this year, but not last year (because the Steelers won the North this year but not last year). This is basically what the Bills, Jets, and Phins (and their counterparts in the other divisions) did over the last 5 years.


AFC North: 44-46

AFC East: 42-48

AFC West: 38-52

AFC South: 32-58


Taking out the division leader's record, we see the AFC East drops a spot behind the AFC North. However, it is clear the AFC East is still doing much better than the lowly AFC South and somewhat better than the AFC West.

Finally let's take it one final step. Let's not only take out the #1 team's won/loss record but let's take out the wins/losses suffered by the lower three teams at the hands of the division leaders. In other words, any beatings the Pats doled out to the other division teams would be taken off the board (as would losses the Jets, Phins, and Bills suffered at the hands of the other three division leaders). Does that prove the weakness of the AFC East?


Nope!

AFC North: 41-27

AFC East: 37-33

AFC West: 33-36

AFC South: 28-43

Again the AFC East is in second following the mighty North, but a good distance ahead of the lowly south and the west.

The fact no other team has taken the division from the Pats since 2008 is more a reflection on the quality of the Pats and not the quality of the other 3 AFC east teams.

 

[flyerhawk]

The fact no other team has taken the division from the Pats since 2008 is more a reflection on the quality of the Pats and not the quality of the other 3 AFC east teams.

Well none of them winning more than 9 games in that span, might have something to do with it.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Well none of them winning more than 9 games in that span, might have something to do with it.

Actually I think the Jets won 11 games in 2010 and was the wildcard.

 

[flyerhawk]

Actually I think the Jets won 11 games in 2010 and was the wildcard.

You are correct. My bad. Don't know how I missed that season.

 

[Southieinnc]

Since 2010 - the following are the AFC division records against teams in the other three AFC divisions.


AFC East: 67-53

AFC North: 65-55

AFC West: 57-63

AFC South: 51-69



Interestingly enough, the AFC East has the best extra-divisional record over the last 5 years.

Since 2010, here are the extra-divisional records, EXCLUDING the best team in each division for the given year just in case one was inclined to believe the Pats skew the record. e.g. The Pats W/L is taken out for each of the five years while the Steelers is taken out for this year, but not last year (because the Steelers won the North this year but not last year). This is basically what the Bills, Jets, and Phins (and their counterparts in the other divisions) did over the last 5 years.


AFC North: 44-46

AFC East: 42-48

AFC West: 38-52

AFC South: 32-58


Taking out the division leader's record, we see the AFC East drops a spot behind the AFC North. However, it is clear the AFC East is still doing much better than the lowly AFC South and somewhat better than the AFC West.

Finally let's take it one final step. Let's not only take out the #1 team's won/loss record but let's take out the wins/losses suffered by the lower three teams at the hands of the division leaders. In other words, any beatings the Pats doled out to the other division teams would be taken off the board (as would losses the Jets, Phins, and Bills suffered at the hands of the other three division leaders). Does that prove the weakness of the AFC East?


Nope!

AFC North: 41-27

AFC East: 37-33

AFC West: 33-36

AFC South: 28-43

Again the AFC East is in second following the mighty North, but a good distance ahead of the lowly south and the west.

The fact no other team has taken the division from the Pats since 2008 is more a reflection on the quality of the Pats and not the quality of the other 3 AFC east teams.

Thread of the year!

 

[iowajerms]

I wonder if the 8 votes for NE still agree.

 

[iowajerms]

I am thinking about changing my pick (Seahawks).

 

[kramer1]

Seahawks? Uh, no.

 

[iowajerms]

When I bumped

NO - 0 votes
IND - 2 votes
GB - 8 votes
PIT - 3 votes
NYG - 0 votes
NE - 8 votes
BAL - 0 votes
SF - 3 votes
SEA - 25 votes
DEN - 2 votes
Other - 2 votes

 

[iowajerms]

Seahawks? Uh, no.

But are they having 1 bad season or are they not good anymore. It's hard for me to believe that a team that made last few SBs and really lost no key players/head coach will be bad from here on out.

 

[cdumler7]

But are they having 1 bad season or are they not good anymore. It's hard for me to believe that a team that made last few SBs and really lost no key players/head coach will be bad from here on out.

I'm torn on this subject. Because of the money devoted to the defense we are seeing the offense just be down right terrible this year. I mean they are ranked 25th in points per game. They are asking a lot more of that defense this year and while they are responding most weeks I just don't see that as a sustainable way of trying to win games. They are going to have to hit big time on some draft picks in the next year or two for the offensive side of the ball to continue to be dominant in my opinion. I think they won't really go below that 8-8 level but to be like the Patriots where every year your name is being mentioned as one of the top-4 or 5 teams for the Super Bowl that is what will have to happen.

 

[Balljim55]

Since they are fixing their coaching woes as we speak = The Titans will be the team of the decade

 

[kramer1]

But are they having 1 bad season or are they not good anymore. It's hard for me to believe that a team that made last few SBs and really lost no key players/head coach will be bad from here on out.

I think they are good. They are not as good as the Patriots. Not even close. That's just silly.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Seattle is still in it. That OL needs to gel quickly but 5 of their last 8 games are at home and all the tough games on the road (spare AZ) are over with. Last 3 road games are Arizona, Minny, and Balt. Balt looks terrible this year and no pass rush with Suggs gone and Minny while tough... I don't think AP will have the success against Seattle that he has some other teams. I wouldn't call those games HARD. Not like GB, Cincy, or St. Louis and they're later, allowing more time for the team to gel.

If Seattle can take both games against AZ, good chance they win the division. I don't trust Carolina in the playoffs so if they take HFA, decent chance road through SBOWL could be against through Seattle.

Seattle has a ton of talent on the roster and they could get hot quickly. If it wasn't for Chancellor's holdout and blown ass coverage due to that and a new DC and the fact the secondary couldn't play together the entire camp/preseason, good chance Seattle takes care of Cincy/Carolina and are 6-2.

Seattle's losses were all 4th quarter defensive collapses. I see that getting cleaned up fast. Again, too much talent.