SUPRMAN said:

But it's never happened in almost 20 years. Meanwhile, the other divisions have had a team win a division title with fewer than 10 wins in a 16-game season at least twice. By and large, the NFC East is the NFL's best division of all time. More fun facts:

NFC East teams have a combined 19 Super Bowl appearances and eleven wins, the highest marks of any division in the NFL. All 4 teams have won at least 3 NFL championships.

AlexdeParis said:

The fact that the NFC East is only division is hasn't happened to yet increases the chances that it will. I also think it increases because the Cowboys can't pick two freebies against the Cardinals every year. With fewer Miami class doormats, you have to be good enough to win when you don't have your A game.
So the statistical probability I say favors a 9-7 record. Struggling Cowboys, Eagles and Giants, with an improved Redskins.
[Edited 7/21/08 19:22pm]

SUPRMAN said:

You're wrong. It hasn't happened yet because the East teams are too good. There has never been a time when all 4 of them have been bad at the same time. Anyway, I have a feeling the Cowboys are going to end up in third place behind the Eagles and Giants.

in related news, the Yankees just ass raped the Twins.

AlexdeParis said:

But if the Cowboys are third with what record?
McNabb or Westbrook get hurt and Eagles do their annual stall and fade.
Giants struggle with Eli, what else is new?
Cowboys, WR could be an issue, especially early. RBBC? Will TO be kept happy?
What will Romo do on the field?
Redskins, improved defense, offense was coming on and if they can offensively consistent, they'll be ok and close to 8-8.
[Edited 7/21/08 19:51pm]

JerseyKRS said:

But no skull?

uPtoWnNY said:

I'm happy!

BlackAdder7 said:

Shut IT!

SUPRMAN said:

10-6 or 9-7

AlexdeParis said:

A three way tie at 9-7? Who wins the tiebreaker? Obviously not Dallas.

SUPRMAN said:

The winner will be 12-4 or 13-3.

AlexdeParis said:

You don't expect the Giants or Philly to do that do you? I can't see either of them doing that. The Giants did win the SuperBowl but they aren't that good. Philly, I don't see it either. They have the weakest defense in the division even after the Giants were raided.

SUPRMAN said:

I have to give it to you: you're very good at cherry picking info and only posting what supports your argument. Last year, the Eagles were indeed 4th place in the NFC East in yards allowed. Of course, they only gave up less than 6.5 more ypg than the Giants, who led the division. Amusingly, their 4th-place finish in the division was good enough for 5th place in the entire conference. More importantly, WRT points allowed, they were the best defense in the division. I think they'll be even better this year.

WOW, my Saints should be dominate this year

AlexdeParis said:

Fifth place in the NFC . . Wheeeee. That'll impress . . . Nobody.
The NFC East benefits from being in such a weak conference that they look good.
I pulled the Philly defense being weak just from memory. Didn't look up stats. I just remember them giving up chunks of yardage and points.
Let's see how many games the NFC East wins against the AFC North.

SUPRMAN said:

OK, only New England, Indianapolis, Dallas, and Philadelphia were in the top 10 in the league for both yards gained and yards against.


I've heard that noise before. The NFC East is so weak that a team that couldn't even win the division title won the Super Bowl.


I'm sure they'll win plenty.

AlexdeParis said:[quote]

SUPRMAN said:

Out of the 16 they'll play collectively I'd say six total maybe seven.


So who is your team?
RAIDER fan here for those who don't know.

SUPRMAN said:

The AFC North only won 10 games against the worst division in the NFC last year; I doubt they'll win that many against the best.


Your team beat my team in a Super Bowl in the Superdome.

AlexdeParis said:[quote]

SUPRMAN said:

Eagles

I would love to like the Eagles but even when they were going to the NFC Championship for what four straight years, they would blow it.
And why can't that team ever find a WR since who . . Carmichael?
I do like them best out of the NFC East though. Love to see them win in Texas

SUPRMAN said:

I don't normally agree with Jason Whitlock, but he's right when he said Eagles management is sandbagging McNabb. They're too cheap to upgrade his weapons. Aside from Westbrook, Philly has no player on offense to stretch the defense and give opposing DC's nightmares. Last one they had is in Dallas.

uPtoWnNY said:

Well, that's not entirely true. They offered Randy Moss more money than the Patriots did this offseason. The word is they also tried to trade for Chad Johnson and were looking at Larry Fitzgerald. I think it's been remarkable what the Eagles and McNabb have been able to do without a great WR (I still think McNabb is underrated), but you can't deny the fact that they made the big breakthrough when they had T.O. (even though they technically advanced to the Super Bowl without him).

AlexdeParis said:

I agree they've done a lot with a little.

AlexdeParis said:

The Eagles must not think much of McNabb - according to WFAN, they were one of the teams in contact with Green Bay about Favre. Donovan must be thrilled about that.

july said:

uPtoWnNY said:

I was going to say that's patently ridiculous, but it does make sense if they'd want to stop him from going somewhere else like, say, Minnesota. But they aren't benching McNabb -- that's ludicrous.

I don't know how reliable the WFAN dude's info was, but sh!t, who knows what goes on behind closed doors with these GMs?