Ah well, so much for perfection, suppose 18-1 will do

Now we have been flexed i would say it all depends on the Texans v Pats game, if the Texans can pull off a win then i'm pretty sure our starters will play and we will be looking to win for the 3rd seed as i think we would rather be looking to play San Diego than the Colts if we make it to the next round. If the Pats win then we will play a vanilla team and most likely let you win.

Glad Indy lost now all their newly found glory supporters I seem to come across on a day to day basis can go back to supporting their crap teams



I seriously have not met as man Indy "fans" in all my life as I have the last 3 weeks I wonder why

. and most of them are people that mysteriously have never even mentioned liking the NFL before and probably wont again





I think it could be a blessing in disguise for Indy though, they now have zero pressure on themselves and can go back to choking in the playoffs against San Diego

how do you think minnesota @ chicago will go?

Good going although stats are pretty meaningless when rating a QB. Hopefully he will win a few playoff games as well.

Terrible end to our season. Sheridan needs to go NOW, we also need a a few DB's and linebackers and possibly another RB. Eli has had his best season by far, trying to force it sometimes due to the defence letting him down.

Stats aren't meaningless really.

Either way the Vikes are in free-fall. Favre did this last year with the Jets, they were fantastic for the first 2/3 of the season and then they collapsed. The same is happening now. He was even quoted as saying earlier in the year that he doubted he could last the whole year.

I still think the Saints are great but they are not as good as they were earlier in the year.

NFC play-offs is looking wide open now...and i like our chances.

The Giants have been terrible this year IMO.


Baltimore and the Jets to make the play-offs IMO from the AFC Wildcard race.

You want your QB to be able to take you down the field to win a championship(or game) Only 5 QBs in history have done this Unitas, Montana, Elway, Eli and Big Ben. Thats a stat which will never show on a stat sheet. Lot's of Qbs have great numbers but its that little bt of magic that sets them apart.

Only 5 QB's have won superbowls?

I agree with what you say, but stats (for everybody) are not meaningless, they are very relevant. Obviously you can't just base off stats but they are a valuable consideration and indicative of how good a player is.

Take Eli for example, he is very good in the play-offs and late in the year and for that is rated very highly. For the rest of the time he isn't any more than average (top 8-12 QB). The fact that he has won a superbowl and is pretty good late in the year, places him above players such as Matt Schaub who perform better than him for 16 games a year.

Game winning drives in superbowls. The reason stats are very misleading is for example..different set of recievers, they can get the dropsies, a more passing based offensive system as opposed to a running system, a suspect offensive line which means the QB having to throw alot away instead of taking the sack, a bad defence which leads to him having to force the ball as points are that much more important. Ratings and stats are misleading to an extent. When the system was first introduced you could go back to see when Unitas had A 50% percentage and a 14-16 TD-INT ratio and he went onto win the superbowl. To put a QB in a top 10 or a top 5 is very stupid based purely on stats, decision making and clutch play will never show on a stat sheet or the effect they have on the rest of their team mates. Its the same reason so many GMs get the drafting of QBs wrong. As for Matt Schab..having Andre Johnson to throw to probably helps him alot as will Jennings for the Packers etc. Eli has a 3rd,2nd and Rookie reciever as his first 3, thats why its hard to compare players on stats alone, people need to be a bit more wiser and think outside the box.

I'd hardly say Favre was to blame last night. 26/40 for 321 yards with no picks and 2 TD's suggests the defeat is hardly down to him.

Playoff picture time. For me it's Arizona or Philly from the NFC though GB may find a way to get involved. Though their record against good teams isn't great. New Orleans have stumbled through the last few weeks and look shot to me but if they get it back together they are a massive threat to everyone. The jury is out on the Vikings as they seem to have hit a wall.

In the AFC it could really be anyone. Indy look strong, San Diego look very good and New England will find a way to go deep in the playoffs I'm sure. If Pittsburgh sneak into the wildcard spot they can't be written off as they still play hard football and Big Ben gives em a shot in any game. The Bengals may have a team of destiny thing going for em with the sad loss of Henry pulling them together. I would go for the Colts or Chargers though.

I don't think there is a player in any sport as important to their team than Peyton. Without him the Colts are average, with him they're 14-1 (14-0). When Brady goes down for a season the Pats won 10 games, if Indy lost Manning, they'd struggle to be .500.

You have to remember that NE had Cassel waiting in the wings. Cassel had been in the NE system for 3 years previous to him taking the reigns from Brady. Would of been interesting to see how Sorgi would of gone instead of the rookie Painter who will obviously struggle.

We won 11 games as it happens (I know Brady started the Kansas Sh[ii[/ity game but I wouldnt count that game as a win for him because the game was still up for grabs that early and Cassel won that with his own play in the game even though I realise the nfl stats say different)

Your right about Cassel being there for a few years but only because his contract lasted that long if it had been shorter he wouldnt have been there, if it had been longer he would have been cut just before the season from what I heard but I think thats the point they rely so much on Manning they havent even considered what would happen should he get a similar injury to Brady. I dont get why they have kept Jim Sorgi for so long you would have thought if he really was that good someone would have at least tried to trade for him at some point!?!

I can see San Diego winning the Superbowl this year. LT seems to be picking up some sort of form at the right time.

They do look very good but they and others have looked unstoppable before and slipped up.

I remember a certain team going 18-1

I get what you are saying but stats are the only way to compare players reasonably, obviously things like winning drives etc should be taken into account. I was agreeing with you. Eli is statisically and IMO rated between 8-12 in QB's during the regular season. Schaub (for example) is a better player and performs better in the regular season, but Eli having a ring and having game winning drives places him higher. (Although i'd rather have Schaub).

I'd never rate a QB (or any player) based soley on stats but to me they are the greatest factor and are the only comparisons that can be draw over all players. Eli is clutch and rightly so, but that can only place him above players at a higher standard for so long. As for recievers, again, why should Eli get rated higher (or others lower) because they have better or worse recievers.

I agree Sorgi would've done better, but I'm thinking more as the team on the whole. The Pats have excellent receivers in Moss and Welker. The Colts do well with one good receiver in Wayne and a bunch of nobodies! The D doesn't really impress me and the running game has been poor for years. I think you could take another decent QB i.e. Schaub and put him in the Pats, Chargers or Saints and you still have great teams. Put Schaub in the Indy team and they'd be poor. Peyton is the most important player in the NFL to his team, bar none.

Not to blame but the collapse of his team around this time last year is remarkably similar.

Play-off wise i expect us to do well. This weeks games (we play Arizona and IIRC Dallas play Philly) are both exactly the wildcard combinations for the week after. I don't think results will have any bearing and possibly all could rest players and keep a little back.

Our D is exceptionally good. #2 against the run and #7 against the pass (i think we are number 2 overall D). We have the best turn-over differential in the league and Woodson. Our D will be fine.

Our success in the play-offs depends on two guys. Chad Clifton and Mark Tauscher. They stay fit and keep Rodgers up and we can score points on anybody. I really think we can go all the way.

Philly are also good but they are always good and seem to blow it. New Orleans are still the team to beat in the NFC. They are still the best team in the NFL.

I can't see past San Diego in the AFC. Rivers is great.

Please dont tell me your that ignorant or stupid? Throwing a ball to Andre Johnson or throwing a ball to Hakeem Nicks? Who is more likely to make a catch? Of course recievers make a difference, give the Packers the bears recievers and they'd be a lesser team. Look at Cutler for example..he throws a lot of picks as he has to force it due to bad recievers and weak defence and he has still beaten more winning teams this season than Rodgers.

I wouldn't know. Maybe Nicks has a higher reception percentage.



Obviously it does make a difference but you can't really take it into serious consideration when saying who is a better player. It poses too many questions and unless you have the best player in a position on your team you could make that claim. If Eli had better recievers he'd be better. If Rodgers had a better O-Line we'd be better etc. Although it may be correct it's just impossible to calculate the effect it'd have.

The only thing that matters is:

Rodgers- PLAYOFFS
Cutler- OUT
Eli-OUT

Bear in mind the defence has been battered, Sanders and Hayden lead a long injury list, and both corners are rookies.

Similar in the recievers, Wayne is superb, Clark is that reciever that just seems to be there, and Collie and Garcon have had decent years. Plus the running game is showing signs of life, at last.

Remember, no-one gave the Colts a hope in hell in 2006, while the Chargers looked all set for a title.....remember?

ELI - 1 Superbowl and 3 playoff road wins and 5 winning seasons.
Rodgers- 0 and 0 and 1




Eli inherited a 4-12 team and Rodgers a 12-4.

Its not a comparison anyhow. Rodgers is a very, very good quarterback who I believe will accomplish all of the above sometime in his career. I'm telling you that you dont rate QB's just on stats alone. The circumstances surrounding him make a huge difference, that's something I've seen Ernie Accorsi write about as well and he drafted Elway, Kosar and Eli and also worked with Unitas for many years, so Im guessing he kinda has a good idea on what you look for in a quarterback. The QB matters most when the game or championship is on the line and the ball is in his hands...I know who I'd want and if your being honest you'd have exactly the same. and as I told you previously there are only 5 QBs in the history of the game that have done it with the championship on the line...there's a reason for that.

Yes, and i agreed. You need balance and that was my point. (I'm not even discussing Rodgers) but there is only so long that Eli's clutchness can elevate him above somebody who is clearly better for the other 16 games but doesn't have the chance to make that one superbowl/important game winning play.

I'm not interested in a whos QB is better debate. You think i base too much on stats and i think you base too much on an abstract concept. The truth is somewhere inbetween, as i've said.


The QB matters all of the time. I know who i'd want. I'd have Favre. A QB who doesn't need a game winning drive but can get it done in the previous 58 minutes rather than the last 2.

On a side note, Is that 5 QB's who have led game winning drives in the last 2 minutes?

4 teams can have the #2 NFC spot still

Eagles - Win and they're in
Vikings - Win + Eagles loss/tie OR Tie + Eagles loss
Cardinals - Win + Eagles loss + Vikings loss
Cowboys - Win + Vikings loss + Cardinals loss/tie