There are 70 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

The weak West?!? NFC poll...

The weak West?!? NFC poll...

Okay, someone posted a few days ago about this issue. But it got me to thinking, which division is technically the weakest in the NFC.

We obviously get no love from the East(not that we deserve any right now) but I'm sick an tired of seeing and hearing "The weak West" and more so than in the past. This division has gone all the way more times this decade than any other NFC division as far as I know. That's 1 thru 4 not just one or two teams. In my mind weak divisions are divisions where no team in it can compete with specific teams.

Heck even when we owned the West so many years ago, I thought it was a joke that the West was considered weak, when we ran roughshod over the whole league not just the West.

So vote for which you think is the weakest Division. And lemme know whatya think.

~Ceadder
Bumpity

C'mon people why visit if you can't leave some conversation? It's the offseason after all?

~Ceadder
Here's something to chew on...

NFC Representation of the past 10 Super Bowls

1999 - Rams
2000 - Giants
2001 - Rams
2002 - Bucs
2003 - Panthers
2004 - Eagles
2005 - Seahawks
2006 - Bears
2007 - Giants
2008 - Cardinals
2009 - ?

In the last 10 years its been

NFC South - 2/10

NFC North 1/10

NFC East - 3/10

NFC West - 4/10

The NFC West has represented the NFC in the SB more than any other division. I wouldn't go as far as saying its the best division but its certainly not the worst.
Well it's easily between the NFC West, and the NFC North. GB beat Seattle, Chicago, beat STL, and Minnesota beat the Cards. Niners beat the Detroit but so did everybody. End result NFC west is the worst. And when the Niners were dominating the NFC West was easily the worst division til bout the time the Panthers joined the league and the realignment. The Rams were a solid team in the 80's but the Falcons and Saints stunk. Besides a few years the Rams, Saints, and Falcons weren't as consistent or good as teams in other divisions. Playoff time and the Niners were always playing teams that weren't in the NFC West.
Originally posted by lamontb:
Well it's easily between the NFC West, and the NFC North. GB beat Seattle, Chicago, beat STL, and Minnesota beat the Cards. Niners beat the Detroit but so did everybody. End result NFC west is the worst. And when the Niners were dominating the NFC West was easily the worst division til bout the time the Panthers joined the league and the realignment. The Rams were a solid team in the 80's but the Falcons and Saints stunk. Besides a few years the Rams, Saints, and Falcons weren't as consistent or good as teams in other divisions. Playoff time and the Niners were always playing teams that weren't in the NFC West.

NFC North is by far the worst and you can't make an argument based on who beat who heads up. The Cards are the best team and by your rationale they beat PHI who WHIPPED Minn, so again you might not want to go heads up in determining who has the better division.
Originally posted by elguapo:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Well it's easily between the NFC West, and the NFC North. GB beat Seattle, Chicago, beat STL, and Minnesota beat the Cards. Niners beat the Detroit but so did everybody. End result NFC west is the worst. And when the Niners were dominating the NFC West was easily the worst division til bout the time the Panthers joined the league and the realignment. The Rams were a solid team in the 80's but the Falcons and Saints stunk. Besides a few years the Rams, Saints, and Falcons weren't as consistent or good as teams in other divisions. Playoff time and the Niners were always playing teams that weren't in the NFC West.

NFC North is by far the worst and you can't make an argument based on who beat who heads up. The Cards are the best team and by your rationale they beat PHI who WHIPPED Minn, so again you might not want to go heads up in determining who has the better division.

So the NFc North's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ranked teams beating the NFC West's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ranked teams means nothing in comaparing which divisin is better. So if heads up doesn't count than what does?
  • BobS
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 7,659
Originally posted by adrenaline:
Here's something to chew on...

NFC Representation of the past 10 Super Bowls

1999 - Rams
2000 - Giants
2001 - Rams
2002 - Bucs
2003 - Panthers
2004 - Eagles
2005 - Seahawks
2006 - Bears
2007 - Giants
2008 - Cardinals
2009 - ?

In the last 10 years its been

NFC South - 2/10

NFC North 1/10

NFC East - 3/10

NFC West - 4/10

The NFC West has represented the NFC in the SB more than any other division. I wouldn't go as far as saying its the best division but its certainly not the worst.


But the division usually had a runaway winner, while the other 3 teams were garbage. when you call a division weak or strong you are talking all 4 teams as a whole, right? I voted NFC West.
Originally posted by BobS:
Originally posted by adrenaline:
Here's something to chew on...

NFC Representation of the past 10 Super Bowls

1999 - Rams
2000 - Giants
2001 - Rams
2002 - Bucs
2003 - Panthers
2004 - Eagles
2005 - Seahawks
2006 - Bears
2007 - Giants
2008 - Cardinals
2009 - ?

In the last 10 years its been

NFC South - 2/10

NFC North 1/10

NFC East - 3/10

NFC West - 4/10

The NFC West has represented the NFC in the SB more than any other division. I wouldn't go as far as saying its the best division but its certainly not the worst.


But the division usually had a runaway winner, while the other 3 teams were garbage. when you call a division weak or strong you are talking all 4 teams as a whole, right? I voted NFC West.

Dude do you NOT get the premise of this?

How many teams from each division went all the way?

I'm not saying that the West is the best but the west is not as weak as you and others believe.

Rams went twice- Won once.

Seahawks went once and by all accounts were robbed of the Lombardi in broad daylight. What can one expect in the City of Detroit. Somebody got stuck up on 8 Mile.

Cards- That game coulda gone either way.

9ers- Meh you can make a case that we are bad but one team does not make or break any division. Not even the 9ers.

Now I challenge anyone to show us why this division is "weak" on this model. Because really this is the only model that counts. NFCWest has 4 Super Bowl appearances. No other division has that, right?

~Ceadder
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by elguapo:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Well it's easily between the NFC West, and the NFC North. GB beat Seattle, Chicago, beat STL, and Minnesota beat the Cards. Niners beat the Detroit but so did everybody. End result NFC west is the worst. And when the Niners were dominating the NFC West was easily the worst division til bout the time the Panthers joined the league and the realignment. The Rams were a solid team in the 80's but the Falcons and Saints stunk. Besides a few years the Rams, Saints, and Falcons weren't as consistent or good as teams in other divisions. Playoff time and the Niners were always playing teams that weren't in the NFC West.

NFC North is by far the worst and you can't make an argument based on who beat who heads up. The Cards are the best team and by your rationale they beat PHI who WHIPPED Minn, so again you might not want to go heads up in determining who has the better division.

So the NFc North's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ranked teams beating the NFC West's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ranked teams means nothing in comaparing which divisin is better. So if heads up doesn't count than what does?

Super Bowls first followed by Win percentage. Which if I were hard pressed to follow division Win percentage we STILL are not the weakest Divison.

~Ceadder
  • Ether
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,494
The NFC West is clearly the worst. The Arizona Cardinals would not have made the Playoffs if the NFC West wasnt' so bad. 6 out of their 9 wins came from within the division... a division in which the 3 other teams combined for a record of 13-35... with one team (the 49ers) accounting for more than HALF of those wins.
Originally posted by Ether:
The NFC West is clearly the worst. The Arizona Cardinals would not have made the Playoffs if the NFC West wasnt' so bad. 6 out of their 9 wins came from within the division... a division in which the 3 other teams combined for a record of 13-35... with one team (the 49ers) accounting for more than HALF of those wins.

true, but they practically trampled all NFC competition once they reached the playoffs... If the NFC West was supposedly the weakest, yielding the Cards as the winners, they would have gotten pummeled in the playoffs. Instead, they were dealing the pain to other teams...
Originally posted by adrenaline:
Here's something to chew on...

NFC Representation of the past 10 Super Bowls

1999 - Rams
2000 - Giants
2001 - Rams
2002 - Bucs
2003 - Panthers
2004 - Eagles
2005 - Seahawks
2006 - Bears
2007 - Giants
2008 - Cardinals
2009 - ?

In the last 10 years its been

NFC South - 2/10

NFC North 1/10

NFC East - 3/10

NFC West - 4/10

The NFC West has represented the NFC in the SB more than any other division. I wouldn't go as far as saying its the best division but its certainly not the worst.


thats a geat point, thanks for pointing that out good job, this divison deserves some respect and that just goes to prove it
interesting to think how much this perception has changed

class of the NFC, suckas
Ceadderman lol RIP