Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

NFC SOUTH


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

    Gonna live and die as a faithful Panther Fan

  • Joined: 09-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,624
  • Reputation: 898
  • LocationMelfa
HUDDLER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 12:25 AM

I posted this on a thread but it is an interesting topic.

 

I think this validates that the NFC South as a whole is the toughest division in football.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nfc_south

 

 

There might be a time when a team is down a year or two but we have to things no other division can say.

 

1. Only Division to have all 4 teams make the Conference Championship.

2. Only Division where each team as won the Division Championship twice.

 

(if we win it this year then that would change to 3 times each)

 

The only thing I would like to see is the records since we started playing in the NFC South.  Surprisingly Atlanta and NO have the same amount of wins.  But Atlanta has 13 more loses and 1 more tie.



#2 CarolinaCoolin

CarolinaCoolin

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 05-December 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,986
  • Reputation: 1,118
  • LocationMaryland
HUDDLER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 02:17 AM

I mean you could argue it. But currently if you are looking at rosters I'd say it's NFC west the NFC north then NFC south then afc north then NFC east then afc east then afc south then afc west. I personally believe our rival matchups are just as good if not better than anyone else's but I'm bias and have extreme hate for the falcons so

#3 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,421
  • Reputation: 2,152
  • LocationAt the lake
HUDDLER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 03:19 AM

You could say that perhaps recently the division is one of the best but none of the teams has a winning record. What are their records since realignment in 2002?

#4 lovelett

lovelett

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 27-September 12
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 439
  • Reputation: 164
  • LocationWest Palm Beach, Florida
HUDDLER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 03:35 AM

This year it is the nfc west so far. My non homer pick if it was possible for the superbowl assuming one of them switched divisions would be Seatle vs SF. That's not possible but they play in the same division so between them and the Rams stepping up makes that the strongest.

#5 Mike

Mike

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 10-April 13
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 284
  • Reputation: 39
HUDDLER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 04:52 AM

You could say that perhaps recently the division is one of the best but none of the teams has a winning record. What are their records since realignment in 2002?


NFC South
---
Atlanta Falcons: 100-75-1 (regular season), 3-6 (play offs) - 3* division titles

Carolina Panthers: 86-90 (regular season), 5-4 (play offs) - 2* division titles, 1* nfc title

New Orleans Saints: 97-79 (regular season), 5-3 (play offs) - 3* division titles, 1* nfc title, 1* super bowl

Tampa Bay Buccaneers: 81-95 (regular season), 3-2 (play offs) - 3* division titles, 1* nfc title, 1* super bowl

#6 DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

    Gonna live and die as a faithful Panther Fan

  • Joined: 09-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,624
  • Reputation: 898
  • LocationMelfa
HUDDLER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:50 AM

Ok I did some research. Though it can be looked at many ways.  I judged it by how well the division did overall not necessary who won the conference or Super Bowl.

 

I gave 8 points for having the best season within divisions and 1 point for having the worst.  ie(when NFC W was won by a 7-9 team the were still last or 2010 NFC South had 3 teams with double digit wins so they were #1)

 

These are the totals (number of top spots)

NFC SOUTH 63  (NS) (3)

NFC EAST 61    (NE) (2)

AFC NORTH 55  (AN) (1)

NFC NORTH 52  (NN) (1)

AFC WEST 48  (AW) (2)

AFC EAST 46  (AE) (1)

AFC SOUTH 42 (AS) (1)

NFC WEST 29 (NW) (0)

 

This is the breakdown

 

2002 - 8 AW, 7 NS, 6 AE, 5 NE, 4 AN, 3 NW, 2 AS, 1 NN 

2003 - 8 NS, 7 NN, 6 NW, 5 AE, 4 AN, 3 AS, 2 NE, 1 AW

2004 - 8 AE, 7 AN, 6 AS, 5 AW, 4 NS, 3 NN, 2 NW, 1 AE

2005 - 8 NE, 7 AW, 6 NS, 5 AW, 4 NN, 3 AE, 2 NW, 1 AS

2006 - 8 AW, 7 NE, 6 NS, 5 AN, 4 NN, 3 AS, 2 AE, 1 NW

2007 - 8 AS, 7 NE, 6 NN, 5 AN, 4 NS, 3 AE, 2 NW, 1 AW

2008 - 8 NS, 7 NE, 6 AE, 5 AS, 4 NN, 3 AN, 2 AW, 1 NW

2009 - 8 NE, 7 AS, 6 NS, 5 AN, 4 NW, 3 AE, 2 AW, 1 NW

2010 - 8 NS, 7 AW, 6 AE, 5 NE, 4 NN, 3 AS, 2 AN, 1 NW

2011 - 8 AN, 7 NN, 6 AW, 5 NE, 4 NW, 3 AE, 2 NS, 1 AS

2012 - 8 NN, 7 AN, 6 NE, 5 NW, 4 NS, 3 AS, 2 AN, 1 AE

 

What surprised me was how good the NFC East has been.  Though Washington was usually on the bottom the rest of the division was pretty tough.   All those screaming NFC West.  Good lord they were always at or near the bottom perennially.  Not even close to the AFC South.

 

Its objective and you can go to the NFL.com and do your own analysis.  You may come up with something different but it won't be too far off

 

http://www.nfl.com/s...G&split=Overall

 

 

 

 



#7 Salvo

Salvo

    BEWB

  • Joined: 19-August 10
  • posts: 956
  • Reputation: 772
  • LocationColorado
SUPPORTER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:04 AM

It's a "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately" title. NFC South has probably been the most competitive for the last decade, but the toughest division right now is the NFC West (which would have been a hilarious thought a couple years ago). The Falcons are the favorites in the South but every other team (and yes, including us) has some questions that need to be answered. The division as a whole is not there yet.

#8 Peppers90 NC

Peppers90 NC

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 03-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 10,408
  • Reputation: 1,702
HUDDLER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:30 AM

I mean you could argue it. But currently if you are looking at rosters I'd say it's NFC west the NFC north then NFC south then afc north then NFC east then afc east then afc south then afc west. I personally believe our rival matchups are just as good if not better than anyone else's but I'm bias and have extreme hate for the falcons so

i believe he is talking about the duration since the realignment, not just this year.  two years ago the nfcw was by far the worst, the nfcs has always been consistently tough.  nfcn wasnt much other than the packers for a while with an occasional good bears or vikings team



#9 CarolinaCoolin

CarolinaCoolin

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 05-December 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,986
  • Reputation: 1,118
  • LocationMaryland
HUDDLER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:30 AM

i believe he is talking about the duration since the realignment, not just this year. two years ago the nfcw was by far the worst, the nfcs has always been consistently tough. nfcn wasnt much other than the packers for a while with an occasional good bears or vikings team



Good point. I'm still not that high on NFCe though. Maybe cause I'm around the skins all the time but I've never though that division was any good they were all just so-so and that made the matchups look better then they were

#10 RoaringRiot

RoaringRiot

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 04-March 13
  • posts: 4,648
  • Reputation: 4,565
  • LocationCharlotte, NC
SUPPORTER

Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:35 AM

The NFC in general is ridiculous right now.

 

 Let's name all of the "bad" teams in the NFC:  Arizona, St Louis, and....that may be it.  Those two teams certainly aren't terrible.  The NFC East is probably the weakest, but any of those teams can beat anyone else on any given day.  

 

Now the "bad" AFC teams:  Buffalo, Jets, Miami, Tennesse, Jacksonville, Oakland, Kansas City, San Diego.  The Colts and Browns are improving but they're not that tough.  

 

The NFC is definitely a tough place to play right now.  




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users