That would be evidence that the NFC East is under-rated or maybe a tougher division considering their record within it and then subsequently winning the Superbowl…twice.
True. I am not downplaying the championships. I am merely pointing out that with the teams that youve mentioned (and you can also throw my Steelers in there) got hot at the right time and rode that wave to win a championship. The Packers were favored when they beat the Steelers as a 6 seed. Why? Primarily because they rollled like a frieght train through the NFC to get to the SB. Teams get hot. It happens. In thw case of Hockey, sometimes all it takes is a goalie to get hot. The Kings rode a hot goalie to the cup. The rest of the team no doubt played better too, but when you have a goaltender standing on his head, you can hide a lot of the flaws that made the Kings an 8 seed in the first plwce.
Maybe. But i dont remember it that way. Last year i remember an underachieving Eagles tewm, a redskins team that was much worse than predicted and a Cowboys team that completely fell flat. Again.
If yiu are implying that the divisional play was so tough that these teams just beat each other up… Not last yesr, thsts for sure.
Sorry, a little late but I didn’t think of any response until now. And all I thought of to say is:
In fairness, I assume the flag was originally thrown for a late hit, and then correctly picked up on that basis.
Well, the Redskins were bad (not awful), but the Cowboys were average, the Eagles were good (one of the best 8-8 teams in the past five years), and of course the Giants won the Super Bowl. And each team in the division played a harder-than-average schedule.
That’s all true, and I’d even throw in that the Eagles are usually a “fun” story apart from the quality of the team on the field, while the Redskins are always making big headlines off the field AND they play in the nation’s capital AND they pull in more money than anyone else. So there are all sorts of reasons that the NFC East gets media coverage and prime time games that having nothing to do with how good those four teams are.
That said, it happens to be a really strong division – in legacies, in recent history, and even right now. (The Giants are among the best teams in the league, while the Cowboys played really well the past two weeks but lost close games to a pair of excellent teams. Washington’s kinda mediocre and Philly might actually be crummy, but both teams are very dangerous when they’re on their game and if you average it all out it’s still an above average division). Per DVOA, the NFC East, taken together, has been above average every year since 2005. The division has taken half of the NFC wild card berths in that span (not including the 2010 Giants, the only 10-win NFC team to miss the playoffs since 1991).
Three of the division’s four teams have storied histories and multiple Super Bowl wins (in fact they have far more Super Bowl wins (12) then the next closest division (AFC North, 7)), and the only team that’s not pulling its weight in that particular regard has nonetheless been excellent for a long time. Over the past 24+ seasons (since 1988), the Eagles have had a winning percentage of .578, which is the 4th highest figure in the league over that span (Pit, GB, NE), along with 15 playoff appearances, tied for the most. The NFC East has had more Super Bowl championship since 1986 (9) than any other division overall, since 1966 (again, 7 for the AFC North), plus that Eagles team that has no championships but has been nonetheless excellent over that span. Basically, since they kicked the Cardinals out of the division there just haven’t been a lot of soft spots on the schedule for NFC East teams.
On balance, over time, taken together, it’s just been a really excellent division: the best, really. The AFC North has Pittsburgh and Baltimore, and that’s rightly lauded as the best rivalry in the NFL, but they’ve had to share their division with Cincy and Cleveland.
I just don’t see any divisions that are as consistently strong and competitive throughout. In recent times, frequently you see one dominant franchise (e.g. NE, Ind) and a rotating cast of also-rans. The NFC East recently has been three really strong, interesting franchises that are each fully capable of winning the division in given year. Only Washington has disappointed, but, as cellar-dwelling teams go, the Redskins are pretty good (very seldom really bad, just kinda consistently below average).
Alright, heh, I’m done typing about this. Point is it’s a really good division, and it deserves most of the *attention *it gets.
Let’s amend your AFC North statement to just say that Pittsburgh and Baltimore have to share their division with only Cleveland, shall we?
We’ll make that change as soon as the Bengals string together two consecutive winning season (last done: 1981-'82).
:eek:
Saying a division is overrated is not the same as saying they are bad. But I do not think they are severely overrated. I think the Cowboys are consistently over-rated as are the Eagles. I actually think the Giants are underrated and Redskins are fairly rated if you will. Now the division gets far more media coverage than most other divisions combined, but it is in the Northeast, NYC, Philly, DC, and then throw in Dallas and its just a product of big media markets and general east coast bias (do not tell me it doesn’t exist, it does).
:mad:
Please don’t bring that up.
