For me Atlanta is just about the most overrated team in the NFL. In their entire 16 games they've played 2 teams with a winning record, 2 stinking teams (Denver and San Diego). And excluding the last 2 games against New Orleans and Seattle, they lost 3 games to teams with losing records (KC, Detroit, and TB). And they barely beat San Fran and Arizona.
Philadelphia is nearly as bad schedule wise, 3 winning teams (Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Green Bay). At least when they beat the bad teams, they usually won convincingly. The other thing I think is a problem for Philly is, mental wise, it will feel like a monumental accomplishment to just get to the Superbowl. Whether they'll admit it or not, they'll subconsciously feel satisfied. Philly should win the NFC Championship handily even without TO. They still have way more talent. However, even with TO, the Steelers beat their brains in by 4 TDs last time. I imagine a similar lashing would ensue whether they play NE or Pit.
The Steelers on the other hand played 7 games against teams with winning records (Baltimore (2), NE, Philly, NYJ, Jax, Buffalo). And they've won all their games since losing to Baltimore 4 months ago. They're focused by the bad game against the Jets and I suppose the national opinion that they can't beat the Pats twice.
The Pats also played 7 games against winning teams (NYJ (2), Buffalo (2), Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Indy). They're the Superbowl champs who just dismantled the best offense in the league. They want a dynasty.
If I was the bookmaker I would make the NFC team about a 2 TD underdog against the AFC team.
Hall of Fame Hero
(Past Year: 7)
Joined: 29 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Keeping da cafe sucka free for 9 years straight
by Fantasy-Sports-Forum » Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:31 pm
I dont think Atlanta is over rated at all. They got no publicity or props all season long unless you are from the ATL area. Eagles are going to win this one and yes they are playing for 3rd place actually. The AFC Championship game features the best two teams in Pro Football this year hands down. So the loser of the superbowl, whether it be Philly or Atlanta will actually be MAYBE the third best team in the NFL.
Azrael wrote:Philadelphia is nearly as bad schedule wise, 3 winning teams (Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Green Bay). At least when they beat the bad teams, they usually won convincingly. The other thing I think is a problem for Philly is, mental wise, it will feel like a monumental accomplishment to just get to the Superbowl. Whether they'll admit it or not, they'll subconsciously feel satisfied. Philly should win the NFC Championship handily even without TO. They still have way more talent. However, even with TO, the Steelers beat their brains in by 4 TDs last time. I imagine a similar lashing would ensue whether they play NE or Pit.
I sure don't know if any of the players would be happy, but come to Philly and you'll see that no fans will be happy with just getting there. We want to win it all this year, and for their sake, the team doesn't want to disappoint the city of Philadelphia.
Statistically, Atlanta didn't even come close to playing like their record indicates. I just don't think they're as good as advertised. That said, I don't think this is a second place game at all. I think Philly/Pitt without TO would be a tossup, add TO and Philly is your favorite. I think NE will win, but it won't be a cakewalk. To me the notion that Philly is playing for second just because they're in an easier conference shows a lack of respect for a very good team.
I don't think it's about what teams you play or how you win, it's about if you win. Your record is what matters not who you faced. So what if you got played tough by teams like San Francisco and Arizona. This is the NFL, you can't expect to walk into a game with every horrible team and have a cakewalk. But playing tough in key situations, and grinding out wins is what matters. Building up your team's confidence, like lighting up the scoreboard like they did last week against St. Louis, and momentum is what matters going into the big games. They've grinded out tough wins before and they could do it again tomorrow.
But no I don't think their offense is overrated. How has anyone ever complimented their offense that could make you think that? I mean everyone knows their receiving core has been lousy, but they led the league in rushing. You can't argue with that, it's stats, numbers that's not opinion. Their offense is explosive, no? They know how to rush the football and make big plays. There's no quarterback more dangerous than Vick on a 3rd and long to just break a huge run. I've never heard anyone say their offense is good, and I'm not saying it is. But it's successful, and dangerous. And once Vick fully graps the West Coast style who knows what they could accomplish.
"Unbelievable, we killed Philly by 4 TDs WITH Owens. How in the wide wide world of sports would they even be close to a favorite?"
well, frankly, you hardly got any dose of wesbrook. He had a cracked rib and the eagles had three division games in a row following the pitt game. you think reid was going to risk him for an out of conference game when you already have an 8-0 record? I think not. You also forget the addition of trotter -- incidentally he made the pro bowl and was inserted after that thrashing. So you are adding two elite players to the mix since that game.
And that game was at home, and there is a bigger book out on big ben. I don;t think the eagles would be favored, but a spread of more than three is ludicrous.
Incidentally, yea the AFC is better. But the mid level AFC teams records versus the middle nfc teams is really irrelevant in this discussion. People say the "afc is better" -- of course it is. But that doesn't mean that the EAgles couldn't be the best either. Funny thing is, the eagles wouldn;t need to beat the afc, just one afc team.
kinda like the pistons. the east stunk, but they were good.