nyjunc said:They beat the Saints who were coming off their first EVER playoff win then they beat the Packers. Let's not act like they beat quality teams. They beat typical weak NFC teams that would never make the playoffs in the AFC then followed it up w/ stinkers the following week against better teams(although the Giants weren't much better).
Dude, they were in the NFC, they had no choice but to play NFC teams.
nyjunc said:The Giants played a creampuff sched, they only played a few good teams and lost to them. It helped having Ari, Was and Dal in their div. Ari was 29th in points scored, Was 24th, Dal was 23rd and it's not like Philly was great as they were mid of the pack. The only winning team the Giants beat was Philly and they owned Philly in thoe days. Thye played Tennessee and gave up 28 pts in a big L, they gave up 38 pts at home to SL when SL didn't have warner or Faulk, they gave up 31 at home to Detroit. They beat NO ONE that year.
Blah, blah, blah..... more excuses for your arguments not holding up. Philly was mid-pack? Since when is 11-5 mid-pack? You are just making crap up as you go along.
nyjunc said:As for NO, that "great" D that was # 5 from week 12 on gave up 31, 24, 28, 27, 7, 26, 28 and 34. Take away 1 week of 7 points(that was against the 4-12 Falcons) and they gave up an average of 28 pts a game from week 12 on. What a might D
Is this your style? Pick the games that fit your position and ignore the rest. You claimed that NO had a crappy D. The fact is that the allowed the 5th fewest points in the NFC. You were wrong. Get over it.
nyjunc said:Which is the same team that gave up 33 pts/gm the previous 7 weeks prior to the Viking game. By the way, from week 11 to week 16 Car scored 20, 20, 16, 14, 20, 20 oh and Carolina AVERAGED 20 pts a game for thes eason. This was not a high powered Car O. They only scored over 30 once all year. Contrast that w/ Minny who averaged 26 PPG and had just scored 45 the week before. Car averaged 20 and scored 20 against Ari, Minny averaged 26 and scored 17.
My point was that in the NFL, anything can happen. The lowly Cardinals played the eventual SB representative from the NFC tough. It is illogical to define a team or a player by selective games. You need to look at their total performance, good and bad.
Wait, Minn averaged 26 points per week? Who the hell was the QB? He must be fantastic....:sidelol:
nyjunc said:I went through every game against playoff teams and showed you. Just b/c the D gives up 25+ doesn't always mean the D played poorly, alot of that had to do w/ turnovers or the O not scoring.
You simply made excuses for every bad game the Viking defense had, nothing more. History clearly shows that the Vikings were among the best in points scored and the worst in points allowed. None of the other nonsense you are spewing changes those FACTS. The Vikings were strong on offense and weak on defense. You like to claim that Culpepper's stats are inflated by playing bad teams. Shouldn't the same be true of the Vikings defense? Are you now going to claim that every bad team the Vikings played had a great offfense and crappy defense? Where does this nonsense end?
nyjunc said:Once again I do not care about meaningless fantasy stats, the #s that count to me are wins and losses and the Jets have more wins and more playoff appearances in that stretch in a MUCH tougher division and conference.
Wins and losses are a team statistic. A QB can only control his play. Culpepper's play is among the best in the NFL. That is not changed by the defense giving up boat loads of points.
nyjunc said:It's a wash, he beat 2 and lost to 2 and 3 of those 4 would NOT have been playof teams in the AFC. I did mention the playoff games in my breakdown.
You mentioned playoff games in your breakdown, but purposely left off games when the offense played well. Claiming they scored 34 points in the "four most important games" in ridiculous. He played in 4 playoff games and you left out the scores from the two victories. WTF?
nyjunc said:He's been there TWICE! by that logic the Jets are better than teams like Pitt and Dal since e have a better SB win %. Manning has been to the playoffs 6 times playing in much tougher divisions and a much tougher conference. He has run into the Patriots and Steelers times. That's not quite like running into the Giants.
More excuses for your logic failing you. Manning is 3-6 in the playoffs. You are the one that is pinning losses totally on the QB. Manning has been to the playoffs regularly since the reallignment put the Colts in with the mighty Texans and Jaguars and now the mighty Titans. Every one of your arguments blows up in your face. The Colts are the biggest beneficiaries in the league of playing in a weak division. Only three of the losses were against the Patriots and Steelers.
nyjunc said:You were NEVER in the race, 1 game is very misleading. You started to win some games late when yo were out of ti and NE didn't even play in Week 17. They drop kicked an XP w/ a backup QB, that should tell you how serious they were taking the game.
Every one of your arguments has a slew of caveats and built in excuses. Your argument is so full of holes, you should be called swiss cheese.
You claim that Culpepper could score against "playoff teams". When I point out 31, and 34 points in the playoffs......oh, not those playoff teams, they were crappy playoff teams. In your twisted logic every team the the Vikings were able to beat must have been crappy.
Every team that the Vikings beat when Culpepper was QB was a crappy team. Every time they lost, it was all on Culpepper. Ridiculous.
Culpepper was only able to play against the teams on his schedule. So far in his career he has put up HOF numbers. If he continues at that pace, the Fins will be legit SB candidates and he will go to the HOF.