Board index » Word on the Street... » Sports




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 300 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2010 10:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:05 am
Posts: 8045
Location: Arlington Heights, IL
Gender: Male
I can't believe the Bears were over .500 for the decade, I guess the two 13-3 seasons helped.

_________________
Always up for a trade
http://db.etree.org/TooBigaManTooSay/list


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 4:23 am 
Offline
User avatar
Former PJ Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:51 am
Posts: 17078
Location: TX
I'm reading every one, just don't have much to add.

_________________
George Washington wrote:
six foot twenty fucking killing for fun


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 5:41 am 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm
Posts: 20537
Location: The City Of Trees
#16: Carolina PanthersImage
Record: 79-81 (.494) (T17th)
Playoff Appearances: 3 (T17th)
Playoff Wins: 5 (7th)
Super Bowl Appearances: 1
Consistency Rank: 21st


The decade opened up spectacularly poor for the team from Charlotte, as the George Seifert experiment completely melted down in 2001 with a horrific 1-15 season, not only costing the former 49ers coach his job but perhaps a shot at the Hall of Fame. To add insult to injury, the expansion of the Texans didn’t even net the Panthers the #1 overall pick in next year’s draft (though fortunately ending up with Julius Peppers turned out well).

For the remainder of the decade, the Panthers were led by John Fox, and the results were slightly above average, though never spectacular. A solid 11-5 season turned into a Super Bowl berth in 2003 upon surprisingly inflicting a third straight NFC Championship loss upon Donovan McNabb and the Eagles. There were close calls in 2005 and 2008, but they faltered in the playoffs both times.

This team could very well be at a crossroads from here on out, as many of its key cogs of the past decade are past their prime (Jake Delhomme, Steve Smith, Muhsin Muhammad), and Peppers will almost certainly not return due to the exorbitant cost it would require. There is also concern that the Fox regime has grown too stale, leading to endless rumors that his successor could be a very prominent NFL face residing in the state of North Carolina…


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 5:47 am 
Offline
User avatar
Stone's Bitch
 Profile

Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:33 am
Posts: 35357
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Gender: Male
The Broncos are in the top half?! :shock:

_________________
Winner, RM all-time NBA tourney. :D

Winner, 2008 US Pearl Jam fantasy league. :D

Everton FC: 3-1-5
Anaheim Webbed D's: 5-6-2
USC Football: 7-2
Denver Broncos: 3-5


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 6:01 am 
Offline
User avatar
Temporary Secretary
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:51 am
Posts: 43609
Location: My city smells like Cheerios
Gender: Male
Image

_________________
"No matter how hard you kill Jesus, he would always just come back and hit you twice as hard."


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 2:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Yeah Yeah Yeah
 Profile

Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 7:53 pm
Posts: 3320
Location: Wyoming
Gender: Male
Mecca wrote:
Image

Doesn't that belong in the religion thread? :?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 1:43 am 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm
Posts: 20537
Location: The City Of Trees
#15: New York JetsImage
Record: 80-80 (.500) (16th)
Playoff Appearances: 5 (T8th)
Playoff Wins: 4 (T8th or 9th)
Consistency Rank: 30th*


*This one should be disregarded, because the negative multiplier was applied to all teams with non-winning records. If it was applied to non-losing records, the Jets would rank 6th in this statistic.

It may be surprising to see this team as high as it is in the rankings. Gang Green certainly hasn’t garnered a truly stellar performance in the last decade. However, aside from its three losing seasons, the Jets have been remarkably consistent, with either nine or ten wins in each of the remaining seven seasons. Five of those years included playoff berths, including some notable playoff wins (the infamous 41-0 whitewashing of the Colts, two upset wins at San Diego).

Credit has to be given due to Chad Pennington, on the team from 2000-2007. No one considers him an elite quarterback, and injuries marred his potential. However, he may be one of the most underrated. Of particular notice is his high completion percentage (66.1), TD to INT ratio (102/64), and rating (90.1). The Jets may have paid a price by cutting him loose in 2008, only to watch him kick them out of the playoffs as part of the hated Miami Dolphins.

Nonetheless, the Jets have a new quarterback in Mark Sanchez that may be able to beat what Pennington provided. Leading your team to the AFC Championship Game as a rookie is a great start. With other key young players on board, such as Darrelle Revis, Shonn Greene, and David Harris, the Jets could be a team on the rise.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:26 am 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
EllisEamos wrote:
Image

i've been enjoying these. thanks GH.

*sorry i haven't had much time to internet lately. :peace:

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm
Posts: 20537
Location: The City Of Trees
#14: Tampa Bay BuccaneersImage
Record: 79-81 (.494) (T17th)
Playoff Appearances: 5 (T8th)
Playoff Wins: 3 (T13th)
Super Bowl Appearances: 1
Super Bowl Wins: 1
Consistency Rank: 22nd


Here, at this merely slightly above average position, the first Super Bowl champion of the decade is revealed. Why? Surely the Bucs were known for more success than that magical year of 2002, correct? In truth, the opposite is closer. In order to win the Super Bowl, a team needs at least three playoff wins. As such, all of the playoff success in Tampa Bay came in that one year.

And what a year it was, as well, given the high stakes expectations of firing Tony Dungy and trading the farm for Jon Gruden. Upsetting the Eagles at Philadelphia and then getting revenge on Gruden’s old team in the Raiders was as good as it gets. However, Gruden simply couldn’t keep the success going after 2002. Veterans Warren Sapp and John Lynch left after 2003, as did Keyshawn Johnson after a notoriously bitter fight with Gruden. Futhermore, Gruden’s quest for a quarterback along the lines of Rich Gannon became quixotic.

Though the Bucs garnered a couple of playoff berths in 2005 and 2007, they also suffered some really bad seasons (5-11 in 2004 and 4-12 in 2006). The lack of success finally led the Glazer family to unexpectedly send Gruden packing after 2008, raising more suspicion that Gruden really won a Super Bowl with the team that Tony Dungy built. Early returns on the Raheem Morris era are not good, as the team is in full rebuild mode evident from their decade-worst 3-13 record to close it out.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 3:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Yeah Yeah Yeah
 Profile

Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 7:53 pm
Posts: 3320
Location: Wyoming
Gender: Male
Every time I see the next team isn't Denver, it makes me happy!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 3:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:36 pm
Posts: 25824
Location: south jersey
2 of the last 3 fucking sucked. guess why.

i think carolina should be higher

_________________
Feel the path of every day,... Which road you taking?,...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
the rams super bowl doesn't count as this decade?

ok.

Image

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:14 am 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm
Posts: 20537
Location: The City Of Trees
EllisEamos wrote:
the rams super bowl doesn't count as this decade?

ok.

Image
One reason why I really like that the Super Bowl does Roman numerals is because it avoids the confusion of years. It royally pisses me off that the 2010 BCS bowls refer to the 2009 seasons.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Of Counsel
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am
Posts: 37778
Location: OmaGOD!!!
Gender: Male
Green Habit wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
the rams super bowl doesn't count as this decade?

ok.

Image
One reason why I really like that the Super Bowl does Roman numerals is because it avoids the confusion of years. It royally pisses me off that the 2010 BCS bowls refer to the 2009 seasons.

Of course, that also makes it impossible to remember what year any given Super Bowl is associated with. Like, I know that the Giants won Super Bowls 21 and 25, but I have to think about it to remember what years those were. And I know they were in the Super Bowl against the Ravens in 2001, because I know I was living in Chicago at the time, but I don't know what number Super Bowl that was.

_________________
Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm
Posts: 20537
Location: The City Of Trees
#13: Minnesota VikingsImage
Record: 84-76 (.525) (11th)
Playoff Appearances: 4 (T13th)
Playoff Wins: 3 (T13th)
Consistency Rank: 4th


As the rankings get closer to the top we discover teams that were almost always contenders in the decade, but could never get over the hump. The Vikings clearly fall under that category. It began with another conference championship embarrassment, though a 41-0 whitewashing at the hands of the Giants was painful in a different way from 1998. The transition from Dennis Green to Mike Tice was a bit rough, and while Tice’s tenure was marked with pure mediocrity, it did feature one highlight: a 2004 playoff win over the hated Packers—at Lambeau Field nonetheless, made famous for the Randy Moss fake mooning incident.

Brad Childress is the current leader, and while many, including Vikings fans, have been somewhat critical, his tenure has been marked with his team getting progressively better. From 2006-2009, the Vikings increased their win total per season by two each year. Childress also solved the franchise’s long drought at running back by drafting Adrian Peterson, and then pulled off a good gamble for a year by grabbing Brett Favre. He led the Vikings once again to the conference championship, but hearts were broken once again in a game marred by horrible turnovers.

With Favre entering yet another year of “do I retire, do I not?”, the Vikings’ future will be inherently up in the air as a result. Regardless of what Favre does, Childress’s progressive success would be best insured by obtaining some sort of hedge plan at quarterback, while the rest of his team is running on all cylinders.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Of Counsel
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am
Posts: 37778
Location: OmaGOD!!!
Gender: Male
The Vikings' logo is racially offensive.

_________________
Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:52 pm
Posts: 8288
and historically innacurate

_________________
Sweep the leg!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Former PJ Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:51 am
Posts: 17078
Location: TX
bmacsmith wrote:
and historically innacurate

um ?

_________________
George Washington wrote:
six foot twenty fucking killing for fun


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Former PJ Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 6:39 pm
Posts: 16154
Location: burbs
Buffalohed wrote:
bmacsmith wrote:
and historically innacurate

um ?

vikings never had moustaches that awesome


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: NFL Decadal Rankings
PostPosted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Former PJ Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:51 am
Posts: 17078
Location: TX
lol, i bet they did

_________________
George Washington wrote:
six foot twenty fucking killing for fun


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 300 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 15  Next

Board index » Word on the Street... » Sports


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Thu Oct 31, 2024 11:51 pm