Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Best Team in NFC South


DaveThePanther2008

Recommended Posts

Got a little bored so I went to Pro Football Reference

Carolina Panthers have the best overall record in the NFC South.

After 23 Seasons we have finally hit .500 (counting playoffs) 192-192-1

The others aren't even close

Atlanta Falcons  52 seasons 361-457-6

New Orleans Saints 51 Season 357-442-5

Tampa Bay Bucs 42 Seasons 261-413-1

17 Franchises ahead of us in overall record including Cleveland (surprised) New England, Indy/Baltimore, KC, Oakland, Denver, Baltimore Ravens, Pittsburgh and Miami from AFC.  Washington, Dallas, NYG, Chicago, Green Bay, Minnesota, SF and Seattle (10 games above)

Most of these teams (including Cleveland 50s and 60's) had a dominate run at one point or another during their time.   Cleveland and Minnesota are the only teams not to win Super Bowl.

Not bad for 23 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But hey, let's not mess with the whole "ineptitude of the franchise throughout its life" idea that has run rampant through the Huddle over the last year. You can point out that 21 teams have worse overall records than us, but it won't matter.

They want to compare us to the history of the Patriots and Broncos, Steelers and Cowboys over the last couple of decades, glossing over the hard years each of those franchises suffered through. They'll tell you that Rivera sucks and that Fox sucked before him. They cut their teeth on Madden and saw Belichick run the last two decades of championships through Foxboro.

In short, they're putzes and schmucks. They want their participation trophies and have no idea how darned hard it is to win a championship in the NFL and how rare it is to even hit .500 for a franchise's lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

But hey, let's not mess with the whole "ineptitude of the franchise throughout its life" idea that has run rampant through the Huddle over the last year. You can point out that 21 teams have worse overall records than us, but it won't matter.

They want to compare us to the history of the Patriots and Broncos, Steelers and Cowboys over the last couple of decades, glossing over the hard years each of those franchises suffered through. They'll tell you that Rivera sucks and that Fox sucked before him. They cut their teeth on Madden and saw Belichick run the last two decades of championships through Foxboro.

In short, they're putzes and schmucks. They want their participation trophies and have no idea how darned hard it is to win a championship in the NFL and how rare it is to even hit .500 for a franchise's lifetime.

Absolutely.   Look at Cleveland.  They has struggled since they came back to Cleveland in 99.  Who would have thought they were over .500 for a lifetime record.  (I sure didnt) That franchise was once the epitomy of an NFL franchise in the 50s and 60s,  Before Brady rose NE out of the shadows.  New England was a subpar team. 

The Steelers I believe have the best overall percentage.  I wasn't doing the math but briefly notice they were well over .500.

For as young as we are we have done quite well, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

But hey, let's not mess with the whole "ineptitude of the franchise throughout its life" idea that has run rampant through the Huddle over the last year. You can point out that 21 teams have worse overall records than us, but it won't matter.

They want to compare us to the history of the Patriots and Broncos, Steelers and Cowboys over the last couple of decades, glossing over the hard years each of those franchises suffered through. They'll tell you that Rivera sucks and that Fox sucked before him. They cut their teeth on Madden and saw Belichick run the last two decades of championships through Foxboro.

In short, they're putzes and schmucks. They want their participation trophies and have no idea how darned hard it is to win a championship in the NFL and how rare it is to even hit .500 for a franchise's lifetime.

Pretty sure the point you're making IS saying you want the participation trophy. NEAT ... we're at .500. Now what? Now nothing. Being .500 or above means nothing. Zilch. Nada. Zero. But hey, as long as you're happy with being better than 21 teams, good for ya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Still Brooklyn said:

Pretty sure the point you're making IS saying you want the participation trophy. NEAT ... we're at .500. Now what? Now nothing. Being .500 or above means nothing. Zilch. Nada. Zero. But hey, as long as you're happy with being better than 21 teams, good for ya.

Baltimore Ravens Franchise Encyclopedia

Seasons: 22 (1996 to 2017)

Record (W-L-T): 190-161-1

Playoff Record: 15-8

Super Bowls Won: 2 (2 Appearances)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Today, we are all Kucci... I miss our feral Russian attack goalie!
    • That was a good segment. Watched every minute of it and would highly recommend it to all fans.
    • "So much of what the Panthers are going to do next week isn't dictated by their preference, but by what happens above them. That's another benefit of not getting locked into need. For instance, if you're thinking you want a receiver, seeing five or six of them go off the board and reacting by taking the sixth or seventh off your list instead of the first (or second or third) something else isn't necessarily wise." https://www.panthers.com/news/ask-the-old-guy-back-into-the-weeds-of-the-nfl-draft-bryce-young-charlotte-hornets-mock-draft This is what some don't seem to get, I don't care how many times it is said: You're NOT going to draft an inferior person at one position, just because that position is perceived as, or is in fact, a bigger need. That would basically nullify, or at least lessen, the reason why you set yourself up via free agency to be able to take the BPA/BAP on the board in the first place.  Yes, the process is complex, very much involved and ongoing, but the overall philosophy is not rocket science. You set yourself up in order not to be pigeonholed into taking a lower graded player at the expense of a higher graded one. This is why Morgan, Gantt and countless of others say the same thing. This is why it's just nonsensical to set yourself in a position where you don't have to, but then act like you have to come hell or high water: "Oh, we have to draft [whatever position], and we can't draft [this position]."  I'm good with whatever they do, until proven otherwise, but even then, you have to be mature enough to know that drafting is an imperfect exercise, filled with hits and misses. And, you generally don't know if you've hit, and especially missed, right away. Moreover, like I've said before, sometimes two players--different positions or not--can both be hits on their respective teams, so in that sense, it's not purely about a right or wrong pick as much as it's about putting puzzle pieces together at the time the best way that you know how.  At the end of the day, people are going to believe what they want to believe, but one thing that's true is that what the Panthers do regarding the draft is dependent upon what others do, and what others do can and does change things. That being the case, it's just another reason why you can't go in with tunnel vision. The thought of doing that is preposterous.
×
×
  • Create New...