In the NFL it's all about Chemistry; the NFC:

[ravidubey]

In the era of free agency and the salary cap, players are evaluated, signed, released, traded, and drafted very differently than ever before. The 1990's "super" teams of Dallas and San Francisco with franchise QB's, impact running backs, offensive and defensive lines laden with blue chippers, lockdown DBs, playmaking LB's and stables loaded with receiving talent are simply no more.

Teams can no longer keep more than a handful of star-calibre players together for long, the salary cap will not allow it and free market-inflated contracts siphon away even marginal stars so quickly that contenders can become pretenders in a single season, and vice versa.

So the "uber" team has been replaced at the top of the ladder by those well-coached teams where a core set of talented veteran players buy into a system and indoctrinate fringe draftees and role-playing free agents. Case in point, the 3 time Superbowl Champion New England Patriots-- a team where there are no favorites and no stars. The players trust the coaches and each other. The coach puts the players in the best position to succeed. They scheme and cover for each others' weaknesses. It's called chemistry, something all great teams have to a degree but is emphasized now more than ever.

The rest of the NFL is striving to meet this example. Other teams see the value of teamwork and sound fundamentals across all three phases of the game.

How chemistry will impact the NFC:

1. Minnesota
2. Dallas
3. Philadelphia
4. St Louis Rams
5. Carolina

Dark Horse: New Orleans
Surprise Drops: Atlanta, Green Bay
Honorable mention: Tampa Bay

CAROLINA PANTHERS
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Loss of Muhsin Muhammad; Steve Smith injury; "Steroid" using kickers.
CHEMISTRY HELP: Solid QB in place, veteran defense
PREDICTION: 4th in NFC
Carolina will rebound from its one-year collapse, but even with Steve Smith back and healthy (let's all hope) they simply can't be the same team without Muhsin Muhammad. The guy led the NFL last year, and you don't replace players like that. But with players like Jenkins and Peppers on the DL, you have to like Carolina's ability to stop people. Carolina seems set at RB, but with question marks at WR you wonder how it will affect Jake Delhomme's confidense. Delhomme known more for heroics and less for accuracy; losing a big target like Muhammad may shake him up more than many would think-- especially if Smith has lost a step from his injury.

MINNESOTA VIKINGS
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Loss of Randy Moss; overhaul of defensive personnel; lack of proven deep threat will change offense; RB's not suited to ball control; shaky coaching.
CHEMISTRY HELP: Franchise QB in place; Talent
PREDICTION: 1st in NFC
CHEMISTRY HELP: Franchise QB in place
Minnesota must also try and fill the cleats of their leading WR, Randy Moss, a guy who many would call the best WR talent ever. He was so dominant that he changed the way Minnesota played offense-- and this was a team that had Chris Carter, Robert Smith, and Jake Reed! A replacement may emerge as Troy Williamson matures, but without a deep threat the Vikings may run more of a ball-control type of game, something they haven't done since they had Terry Allen. This approach could be reinforced by the dramatic two-year overhaul of the defense. Nearly every significant defensive position has been filled by a free agent or key draftee. Can the Vikings find their identity among such drastic changes on both sides of the ball and constantly having to defend their shaky coach Mike Tice? One deciding factor may be the presence of veteran Duante Culpepper, easily the best passer and most physical QB in the conference. Culpepper is why Minnesota tops my NFC rankings.

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Key holdouts and friction; years of unsuccessful runs taking toll.
CHEMISTRY HELP: Franchise QB in place; veteran defense; coaching
PREDICTION: 3rd in NFC
The Eagles caught lightning in a bottle last season as the presence of Terrell Owens on offense removed a huge amount of pressure from the defense allowing the secondary to adjust to new starters. New DE Jevon Kearse added pressure at times, but nothing that would justify his huge contract. The key addition for Philly was the return to health of RB Michael Westbrook-- a key player down the stretch and a major factor in both playoff wins. But both Westbrook and Owens are holding out and disturbed WR Freddie Mitchell has been release. Owens even publicly called out QB Donovan McNabb regarding his Superbowl meltdown, otherwise a taboo topic in the City of Brotherly Love. Can the Eagles survive this kind of locker room friction? I say not over the long haul. The Eagles will fight through at first, but when added to the weariness that five consecutive unsuccessful playoff runs brings this added trouble will be too much.

ATLANTA FALCONS
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Staying on top of a very competitive division; sophomore slump for Mora Jr.
CHEMISTRY HELP: veteran defense;
PREDICTION: Out of playoffs
Atlanta will face a Southern division itching to take them down. Many thought the Falcons took this division by default and that the Panthers and Saints were actually its best teams during major stretches of the season. I believe Atlanta also took a lot of teams by surprise last year but were exposed against Philadelphia. Look for atlanta to sport a disappointing 2-4 division record with Carolina edging out (barely) New Orleans for the division title. Successful coaches also tend to rapidly slump in this division (Reeves, Fox, Haslett), so I would carry my rabbit's foot if I were Jim Mora Jr.

NEW ORLEANS SAINTS
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Inconsistent QB; Suspect Organization
CHEMISTRY HELP: Talent; desperation
PREDICTION: Darkhorse contender
New Orleans-- my choice for dark horse. All the elements are in place for a run, and this is probably Aaron Brooks' last chance to prove himself so he will likely be doubly motivated to win. The Saints have dangerous WR's and RB's and the best combination of pass rushers in the NFL in Grant, Smith, and Howard. Brooks may be so motivated that he gets the Saints organization back from outer space and focused like they were during Haslett's rookie season as HC.

GREEN BAY PACKERS
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Desperate old QB; WR Holdout; RB legal issues
CHEMISTRY HELP: Experience; underrated coach
PREDICTION: Out of playoffs
The Packers, regardless of what happens every year seem to find a way to contend but it started to unravel two seasons ago as they were uncustomarily let down by the great Brett Favre himself with an unusual last minute interception. Followed by his shaky playoff performance last year and not helped by Ahman Green's legal troubles and Javon Walkers' holdout, I look for Green Bay to finally tumble into the abyss that is NFL rebuilding. This team is crumbling at the seems, and when it goes (despitre Sherma's competant patch jobs) it will go South all at once.

ST LOUIS RAMS
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Steven Jackson relegating Faulk to backup; Greatest Show on Field Turf?
CHEMISTRY HELP: Talent; class of Marshall Faulk
PREDICTION: 4th in NFC
The Rams players are so used to criticism of their uniquely arrogant coach that they tend to fall in line and play. This team plays a guaranteed 10 games per year indoors in a dome, and so it likely won't get very far in December unless it wins home field advantage throughout the playoffs-- and that will not happen because of their defense which has yet t adjust to the loss of Grant Wistrom. Their huge loss vs. Atlanta in the playoffs shows just how far they need to go to improve, but with WR's as great as Torry Holt (the most underrated WR in the league) and Isaac Bruce they are in every game they play. People tried hard also to make a stink of Steven Jackson being benched too much and then too little, but players these days know such is the way of things and it's acutally good for the team that there will be a transition period. Marshall Faulk knows he can't carry the load anymore, and class act that he is I look for him to make huge plays late in the year and in the playoffs. A Hall of Famer like Faulk wouldn't want to go out any other way.

DALLAS COWBOYS
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Many new players; switch to 3-4 defense; QB controversy
CHEMISTRY HELP: Coaching; veteran players; "character" players
PREDICTION: 2nd place in the NFC
This brings us to our Dallas Cowboys. With Drew Bledsoe, Marcus Spears, Demarcus Ware, Kevin Burnett, Aaron Glenn, Marion Barber, maybe Chris Canty, Anthony Henry, Fergy, Marco Rivera, and let's throw in Quincy Morgan and Terry Glenn and Julius Jones getting healthy the Cowboys have added a hugely talented group of players who have yet to play a single down together. Fortunately they join an experienced core of Ellis, Glover, Nguyen, Roy, Newman, Adams, Allen, Witten, Campbell, Terry Glenn, and Keyshawn Johnson who have geled together through years of good and bad times. Pete Hunter notwithstanding, there is not a bad seed among the bunch, and barring injury this is will be a very good football team. It just comes down to chemistry, especially if Bledsoe has some bad outings because Cowboys fandom will launch into Bill Parcells with the weight of the world to start Drew Henson, and he won't be able to bring himself to do it. I just see too many good things developing here though. From Witten being coached by his new QB's favorite old receiving target to a veteran like Aaron Glenn becoming available and wanting to come to Dallas. The sky is the limit for this team, and if Duante Culpepper takes Minnesota into its usual mid-season swoon LOOK OUT!

[dargonking999]

great post thanx for the info

[Qwickdraw]

Dallas- 2nd in the NFC?
Philly- 3rd in the NFC?

I like it.

[AJM1613]

:banghead:

[AJM1613]

BTW, I still haven't heard an arguement of how you think you will even be a better team than New York.

[TheEnigma]

BTW, I still haven't heard an arguement of how you think you will even be a better team than New York.

Eli Manning

[Smashmouth24]

What the hell chemistry do Minnesota and Dallas have exactly?

[Alexander]

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Key holdouts and friction; years of unsuccessful runs taking toll.
CHEMISTRY HELP: Franchise QB in place; veteran defense; coaching
PREDICTION: 3rd in NFC
The Eagles caught lightning in a bottle last season as the presence of Terrell Owens on offense removed a huge amount of pressure from the defense allowing the secondary to adjust to new starters. New DE Jevon Kearse added pressure at times, but nothing that would justify his huge contract. The key addition for Philly was the return to health of RB Michael Westbrook-- a key player down the stretch and a major factor in both playoff wins. But both Westbrook and Owens are holding out and disturbed WR Freddie Mitchell has been release. Owens even publicly called out QB Donovan McNabb regarding his Superbowl meltdown, otherwise a taboo topic in the City of Brotherly Love. Can the Eagles survive this kind of locker room friction? I say not over the long haul. The Eagles will fight through at first, but when added to the weariness that five consecutive unsuccessful playoff runs brings this added trouble will be too much.



I heard the same thing last year.

The Eagles are going down, their defense will suffer without Vincent and Taylor, T.O. is a cancer--blah blah.

They are still more talented than we are. Just because we had a strong offseason is no reason to start thinking crazy. Wait until we play a game and above all else, kick their butts before claiming superiority.

[AJM1613]

Eli Manning

Drew Bledsoe.

[Alexander]

Drew Bledsoe.

You fight dirty.

But then again, Eagles fans are crude louts.

[Tio]

Drew Bledsoe.Uhh, eli manning? Has that sunk in?

If not, how about a defenseive line up of ware, williams, glover, ferguson, spears, ellis, burnett, newman, henry, glenn, and nguyen?

[Rack Bauer]

DALLAS COWBOYS
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Many new players; switch to 3-4 defense; QB controversy
CHEMISTRY HELP: Coaching; veteran players; "character" players
PREDICTION: 2nd place in the NFC

Nice.


PHILADELPHIA EAGLES
CHEMISTRY RISKS: Key holdouts and friction; years of unsuccessful runs taking toll.
CHEMISTRY HELP: Franchise QB in place; veteran defense; coaching
PREDICTION: 3rd in NFC


Niiiiiiiiiice. :D

[AJM1613]

Uhh, eli manning? Has that sunk in?

If not, how about a defenseive line up of ware, williams, glover, ferguson, spears, ellis, burnett, newman, henry, glenn, and nguyen?

And you do realize Manning beat you, right? He can't get much worse than he was last season.

A defensive lineup of three rookies and a group of older players that have been consistently declining over the past few seasons isn't exactly frightning. Strahan, Umenyiora, Tuck, Joseph, Robbins, Emmons, Pierce, Green, Allen, Peterson, Walker, Webster, Wilson, and Williams, on paper is a better and more experienced lineup.

[Rack Bauer]

And you do realize Manning beat you, right? He can't get much worse than he was last season.


He beat a horrible defense that had been beaten by the likes of Kyle Boller and Carson Palmer. What's your point?


What do you think improved more this year, Manning or the Cowboys D? Seriously.

[Alexander]

A defensive lineup of three rookies and a group of older players that have been consistently declining over the past few seasons isn't exactly frightning. Strahan, Umenyiora, Tuck, Joseph, Robbins, Emmons, Pierce, Green, Allen, Peterson, Walker, Webster, Wilson, and Williams, on paper is a better and more experienced lineup.

Glover made the Pro Bowl---again.

Declining indeed.

Speaking of declining, Strahan is in that particular boat. So is Shaun Williams.

Barrett Green, Fred Robbins and William Joesph are far from world beaters. Carlos Emmons is a solid LB, but Justin Tuck and Corey Webster are rookies, just like our young players. Gibril Wilson is a fine young safety. Frank Walker is average. Will Allen and Will Peterson are good corners, if they can both stay healthy and play together on the field at the same time.

The lineup from New York may be more experienced, but the talented part remains to be seen.

If you are looking for a wide talent chasm, try again.

[AJM1613]

What do you think improved more this year, Manning or the Cowboys D? Seriously.

Seriously? The Giants offense. Shockey, Burress, Toomer, Snee, McKenzie, are five of their best offensive starters and none of them played against you. Also, Jacobs has to be an upgrade over Ron Dayne.

[Alexander]

also Jacobs has to be an upgrade over Ron Dayne.

So is a corpse in a wheel barrow.

What is your point?

[AJM1613]

Glover made the Pro Bowl---again.

Declining indeed.

Speaking of declining, Strahan is in that particular boat. So is Shaun Williams.

Barrett Green, Fred Robbins and William Joesph are far from world beaters. Carlos Emmons is a solid LB, but Justin Tuck and Corey Webster are rookies, just like our young players. Gibril Wilson is a fine young safety. Frank Walker is average. Will Allen and Will Peterson are good corners, if they can both stay healthy and play together on the field at the same time.

The lineup from New York may be more experienced, but the talented part remains to be seen.

Do you really think Glover is as good as he was in New Orleans? Or even in 2003?

Williams is 28, I don't think missing fourteen games is the same as being in decline.

Tuck is their third defensive end and Webster is the dime back. If they don't pan out the defense can still be effective.

[Alexander]

Do you really think Glover is as good as he was in New Orleans? Or even in 2003?

Williams is 28, I don't think missing fourteen games is the same as being in decline.

Tuck is their third defensive end and Webster is the dime back. If they don't pan out the defense can still be effective.

Do you really think Kearse is as good as he was in Tennessee in his rookie year?

Welly well. Look who made the Pro Bowl last?

As for Williams, decline means you basically know you are on your way out and you take a paycut to stay with your team, which he did.

As for Tuck and Webster, they are good additions. But no better than Ware, Spears or Burnett. We added three players who at one time were considered first round talents. They added two.

I would suggest you stick to the team you know best. Scouting the Giants is not really your strong suit.

[AJM1613]

Do you really think Kearse is as good as he was in Tennessee in his rookie year?

He's close.

Welly well. Look who made the Pro Bowl last?

The Pro Bowl is a joke. Coleman should have went.

As for Williams, decline means you basically know you are on your way out and you take a paycut to stay with your team, which he did.

No that's team loyalty.

As for Tuck and Webster, they are good additions. But no better than Ware, Spears or Burnett. We added three players who at one time were considered first round talents. They added two.

They also had better free agent acquisitions and got more players coming back from injuries.

[Alexander]

He's close.

Is that all you have?

Can you attempt to claw my eyes out better next time?

The Pro Bowl is a joke. Coleman should have went.

Coleman had a great year, but he also was not on the field as much as Glover and was not nearly as key to his defense. I guarantee you if Kearse went, you would be singing a different tune.

No that's team loyalty.

Ask Shaun Williams. I bet he bleeds navy and red.

Play along here.

They also had better free agent acquisitions and got more players coming back from injuries.

The Giants had a good offseason. I am not denying that. Burress might be a key addition. Antonio Pierce is very underrated. But you have shown nothing to prove that the Giants have improved themselves significantly over the Cowboys.

If I had to grade both franchises, I would rate both offseasons at a par. But since your team's offseason resembles a train wreck and your draft was replete with backups, I fully understand your fear.

[AJM1613]

Coleman had a great year, but he also was not on the field as much as Glover and was not nearly as key to his defense. I guarantee you if Kearse went, you would be singing a different tune.

Because Kearse deserved to go.



Ask Shaun Williams. I bet he bleeds navy and red.

Play along here.

What??

The Giants had a good offseason. I am not denying that. Burress might be a key addition. Antonio Pierce is very underrated. But you have shown nothing to prove that the Giants have improved themselves significantly over the Cowboys.

If I had to grade both franchises, I would rate both offseasons at a par. But since your team's offseason resembles a train wreck and your draft was replete with backups, I fully understand your fear.

Well because the Giants beat you twice last season, even a "par" for both teams would make them better.

And the most improved teams from season to season improve because the players already on the team improve, not the offseason acquisitions.

I liked our offseason, now all we have to do is trade TO for a first round pick and a decent slot receiver and it'll be perfect.

[dargonking999]

BTW, I still haven't heard an arguement of how you think you will even be a better team than New York.

First we have a stronger Defense

SEcond there offense has not proven to be anywhere near dangerous

Thrid, Eli still has to prove he can be a great QB, he has to show up this year.

thats my argument of course;)

[Alexander]

Because Kearse deserved to go.

How did he deserve to go? Please sell this bridge.

What??

I knew I may have to simplify it for you.

Shaun Williams was so loyal that he took a paycut to come back to the Giants? This league is screaming for safeties and if he was either healthy enough or talented enough, he could have commanded a payday. He played it safe. I doubt it had a thing to do with team loyalty. GOOGLE the articles when he resigned with the Giants. Find where he expresses the feelings that it was best if he just stayed aboard.

Well because the Giants beat you twice last season, even a "par" for both teams would make them better.

So does that mean that since the Bengals beat your team they are better?

And the most improved teams from season to season improve because the players already on the team improve, not the offseason acquisitions.

And? What does this have to do with this discussion?

Are you assuming that not a one of Dallas' players improves?

[TobiasEagle77]

I don't want to touch your prediction for Philadelphia, because I'd just be saying the same things I've said in other threads.

But I'd like to look at Minnesota... who I think you are rating WAY too high.

I believe that you are assuming they will have a good defense because they signed a bunch of guys. How can you have a theme of "chemistry is key" and then say that the best team in the NFC will be the one that has arguably the least chemistry. They will have 5 starters on defense that will be learning a new system. How often are free agent defenders immediately effective in a new system? How often are starting rookies effective? To make matters worse, they will be asked to succeed in a system where other talented players have failed. And they will be coached by Mike Tice.

I predict that Minnesota's defense will be slightly above average, at best. Meaning they will, at best, be ranked 12th in least points allowed.

[AJM1613]

How did he deserve to go? Please sell this bridge.

By having more of an effect on our team than Kerney had on his.

Shaun Williams was so loyal that he took a paycut to come back to the Giants? This league is screaming for safeties and if he was either healthy enough or talented enough, he could have commanded a payday. He played it safe. I doubt it had a thing to do with team loyalty. GOOGLE the articles when he resigned with the Giants. Find where he expresses the feelings that it was best if he just stayed aboard.

And that makes him a worse player because? He's coming off a serious injury, which is risky for players entering free agency.

So does that mean that since the Bengals beat your team they are better?

They only beat us once, and they only beat our backups. There aren't man teams in the league that would have lost to Koy and Jeff.


And? What does this have to do with this discussion?

Are you assuming that not a one of Dallas' players improves?

I'm saying the team with the best offseason doesn't always sign the best players. The Giants have a better team right now than you, and their biggest upgrades will not come from free agency, it will come from getting Shockey, Toomer, Carter, Strahan, Wilson, and Williams healthy.

And it was also a response to the Eagles not doing much in the offseason.

[dargonking999]

I'm saying the team with the best offseason doesn't always sign the best players. The Giants have a better team right now than you, and their biggest upgrades will not come from free agency, it will come from getting Shockey, Toomer, Carter, Strahan, Wilson, and Williams healthy.

And it was also a response to the Eagles not doing much in the offseason.

Well we did lose our best RB for half a season, our best blocking TE,our fastest WR, we lost 3 or 4 starting CB (i forgot how many) we lost our SS did i forget anybody.

[goshan]

This post had good potential until you started confusing 'chemistry' with talent and complementary skills.
Sorry...it isn't about Chemistry (or, in other words, how much the players love each other)...its about assembling a group of complementary players that make plays at the right time.

You are right about Super Teams and lack of stars at every position, but stating that it is 'chemistry' is not accurate.

[RoysAHitta]

how did we go from getting swept by the eagles last year.. to now surpassing them and being #2 in the nfc. am i on an acid trip?

[dargonking999]

how did we go from getting swept by the eagles last year.. to now surpassing them and being #2 in the nfc. am i on an acid trip?

When you get your best RB, your fastest WR, your best blocking TE, and a better back RB, with a better defense.

well ask the Steelerhow they went from thrid in the division, to the best in the AFC

[ravidubey]

Drew Bledsoe.

This post was about my almost certainly biased opinion but also on chemistry which I believe is vital for teams to succeed today. When teams lose it, they can go from a play away from a Superbowl Championship like Carolina in 2003 to bottom feeding in their division in 2004.

If one believes Carolina was a paper tiger, they would be wrong-- the Panthers were a very good team who suffered key injuries that disrupted the chemistry that took them almost to the house in '03.

I think Drew Bledsoe is better than how he is portrayed in the media and perceived by others. It's human nature to hammer a previously untouchable guy whose team wins the Superbowl once he leaves the field. It's called rationalizing. Craig Morton, a perfectly fine QB in his own right, suffered the same negative bias that Bledsoe is getting now because the Cowboys won the Superbowl once Staubach became the starter.

As for the Eagles, yeah they've been good... but-- as in there's always a but. I think they hit the jackpot when they drafted McNabb, but he's squandered his opportunities to win. Not winning the Superbowl after four consecutive conference championship game appearances is plain ridiculous. I can only imagine how Jim Kelly feels, I bet Donovan McNabb doesn't have to imagine too hard.

[Hoov]

Because Kearse deserved to go.





What??



Well because the Giants beat you twice last season, even a "par" for both teams would make them better.

And the most improved teams from season to season improve because the players already on the team improve, not the offseason acquisitions.

I liked our offseason, now all we have to do is trade TO for a first round pick and a decent slot receiver and it'll be perfect.

what off season ???
and now you think you improve your team by trading the only proven wr you have ? again, pinkston should not be a starter on any team. wr have to do more than be fast, they should catch the ball.

[Billy Bullocks]

BTW, I still haven't heard an arguement of how you think you will even be a better team than New York.

ill shoot it at you completely honest, no rose colored glasses. Almost no QB's are that great until year 3. Just look around. Barber isn't getting any younger, Burris is overrated, as is J-Shock. Suspect Defense. Strahan is no longer where he was.

Bledsoe is the reason we are better this year. We have, IMO an equal running game, better WR's and TE's, a far superior D, on paper of course. NYG were in turmoil last year, and IMO they still are. Their draft was mediocre, and therofre we are iller. Just take it as it is.

[cannonball44]

Well we did lose our best RB for half a season, our best blocking TE,our fastest WR, we lost 3 or 4 starting CB (i forgot how many) we lost our SS did i forget anybody.

Yeah, Our fullback, and Key, QM, both played with nagging injuries. and I think it was 5 corners.

[AJM1613]

what off season ???
and now you think you improve your team by trading the only proven wr you have ? again, pinkston should not be a starter on any team. wr have to do more than be fast, they should catch the ball.

What does a wide receiver has to do with team success?

Trading Owens somewhere for a first or second and a mid round pick, and then trading for a player like Doug Gabriel or Rashaun Woods to play the slot, so we don't have to rely on a rookie.

We got to the Super Bowl by beating the two best teams in the NFC without TO, remember?

[pgreptom]

Unfortunately, for us... the one thing we will lack this year is chemistry.

We brought in a horde of free agents, and a few high draft picks.. just hop they mold half way through the year.

[AJM1613]

ill shoot it at you completely honest, no rose colored glasses. Almost no QB's are that great until year 3. Just look around.

Peyton had a 90.7 quarterback rating in his second season and McNabb was the runner up for MVP. Tom Brady led his team to the Super Bowl and beat the greatest show on turf. Culpepper had a 98 quarterback rating in his second season and brought the Vikings to the NFC Championship game. Favre had a 64% completion rate and an 85 quarterback rating. Vick was a completely different quarterback in his second season. Kurt Warner was the NFL MVP, won a Super Bowl and had an 109.2 quarterback rating. Steve McNair had a 90.6 quarterback rating. Leftwich was a very good quarterback in his second season and brought the Jaguars back quite a few times. David Carr was the first quarterback ever to play without an offensive line. Jake Plummer beat you in the playoffs. Carson Palmer only had a 10% bad throw percentage. Marc Bulger replaced Kurt Warner and had an 101.5 quarterback rating. Aaron Brooks took over the Saints and was just as good then as he is now.

[dstew60105]

What does a wide receiver has to do with team success?

Trading Owens somewhere for a first or second and a mid round pick, and then trading for a player like Doug Gabriel or Rashaun Woods to play the slot, so we don't have to rely on a rookie.

We got to the Super Bowl by beating the two best teams in the NFC without TO, remember?

How is Rashaun Woods not like a rookie. Did he even see the field last year on a horrible 49er team? The Eagles would be screwed w/o TO. The are also screwed with him.

[morasp]

We got to the Super Bowl by beating the two best teams in the NFC without TO, remember?

Burn that image into your mind because unfortuantely that's going to be as good as it gets.

[AJM1613]

How is Rashaun Woods not like a rookie. Did he even see the field last year on a horrible 49er team? The Eagles would be screwed w/o TO. The are also screwed with him.

He had seven catches for 160 yards.

He played at receiver in twelve games.

[kmd24]

Seriously? The Giants offense. Shockey, Burress, Toomer, Snee, McKenzie, are five of their best offensive starters and none of them played against you. Also, Jacobs has to be an upgrade over Ron Dayne.

Your Dallas hate blinders are on.

First, I assume you realize that Shockey, Snee, and Toomer all played in week 5 and that you are merely addressing the week 17 game by your highlighted comment.

If you look at the play-by-play of that game, you will see a fairly conservative game plan that was undone by a fourth quarter defensive collapse fueled by a 43 yard pass intereference penalty, a roughing the passer penalty, and a fumble by guys who won't see the field in 2005. The Giants were very fortunate to win that game. Don't play it off as if the Giants turned in some dominating performance.

Now, on to the reasons Dallas should have fewer of this kind of collapse in 2005.

The additions to the Dallas secondary this year are huge when you consider the players manning the RCB position last year. Henry, Hunter, and Aaron Glenn will be vying for the CB position opposite Newman. Newman is still early in his career and may continue to develop into a quality corner.

Dallas added four first round-type guys in the front 7. Ware, Spears, Burnett, and Canty are all big time players. The perception that all of these rookies need to contribute is a bad one. In reality, Ware is probably the one guy who Dallas really needs to contribute big. If the other guys do, the defense could be flat out scary. Bradie James may also show improvement - he is still early in his career as well.

Dallas added Jason Ferguson to the DL. This guy will shore up a position that has been manned by castoffs since BP's arrival. The improvement at NT will be huge. This addition is often overlooked, but it will be the first time Dallas has had a proven player there in quite a while.

The biggest remaining question mark is at FS. If you can say that Jacobs, a guy who has never proven anything in college, let alone the NFL, will be an improvement over Ron Dayne, one of the most productive players in college history, then I feel safe in saying that Justin Beriault will be an improvement over Tony Dixon.

I don't know much about the Giants and their plans for 2005. They may have made moves that give them a chance to improve quite a bit on offense. What I do know is that it is very likely that Dallas will have improved dramatically on defense.

[adbutcher]

Chemistry? Surely this article jest. :cool:
:iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles: :iggles:

[CoCo]

You often can't tell which teams are best even early in the regular season. I don't think its worth arguing very hard in the offseason.

I am glad that Dallas added plenty of players to give them a shot at significant improvement in 2005. We'll have to wait a while to see how it all develops.

[morasp]

Your Dallas hate blinders are on.

First, I assume you realize that Shockey, Snee, and Toomer all played in week 5 and that you are merely addressing the week 17 game by your highlighted comment.

If you look at the play-by-play of that game, you will see a fairly conservative game plan that was undone by a fourth quarter defensive collapse fueled by a 43 yard pass intereference penalty, a roughing the passer penalty, and a fumble by guys who won't see the field in 2005. The Giants were very fortunate to win that game. Don't play it off as if the Giants turned in some dominating performance.

Now, on to the reasons Dallas should have fewer of this kind of collapse in 2005.

The additions to the Dallas secondary this year are huge when you consider the players manning the RCB position last year. Henry, Hunter, and Aaron Glenn will be vying for the CB position opposite Newman. Newman is still early in his career and may continue to develop into a quality corner.

Dallas added four first round-type guys in the front 7. Ware, Spears, Burnett, and Canty are all big time players. The perception that all of these rookies need to contribute is a bad one. In reality, Ware is probably the one guy who Dallas really needs to contribute big. If the other guys do, the defense could be flat out scary. Bradie James may also show improvement - he is still early in his career as well.

Dallas added Jason Ferguson to the DL. This guy will shore up a position that has been manned by castoffs since BP's arrival. The improvement at NT will be huge. This addition is often overlooked, but it will be the first time Dallas has had a proven player there in quite a while.

The biggest remaining question mark is at FS. If you can say that Jacobs, a guy who has never proven anything in college, let alone the NFL, will be an improvement over Ron Dayne, one of the most productive players in college history, then I feel safe in saying that Justin Beriault will be an improvement over Tony Dixon.

I don't know much about the Giants and their plans for 2005. They may have made moves that give them a chance to improve quite a bit on offense. What I do know is that it is very likely that Dallas will have improved dramatically on defense.

That was a really good post!

[AJM1613]

Your Dallas hate blinders are on.

Oh yeah, I love the Giants. :confused:

First, I assume you realize that Shockey, Snee, and Toomer all played in week 5 and that you are merely addressing the week 17 game by your highlighted comment.

And they beat you by SIXTEEN, at HOME. Because Manning is the reason most Cowboy fans have given to prove that Dallas is the better team, I didn't feel the game without Manning was as relevant.

If you look at the play-by-play of that game, you will see a fairly conservative game plan that was undone by a fourth quarter defensive collapse fueled by a 43 yard pass intereference penalty, a roughing the passer penalty, and a fumble by guys who won't see the field in 2005. The Giants were very fortunate to win that game. Don't play it off as if the Giants turned in some dominating performance.

But they still won, with half their current team not playing (eleven starters, backup runningback and slot receiver).

The additions to the Dallas secondary this year are huge when you consider the players manning the RCB position last year. Henry, Hunter, and Aaron Glenn will be vying for the CB position opposite Newman. Newman is still early in his career and may continue to develop into a quality corner.

If Hunter and Glenn win that spot from Henry, you wasted some serious money.

Dallas added Jason Ferguson to the DL. This guy will shore up a position that has been manned by castoffs since BP's arrival. The improvement at NT will be huge. This addition is often overlooked, but it will be the first time Dallas has had a proven player there in quite a while.

Blade was a fine player in 2003.

The biggest remaining question mark is at FS. If you can say that Jacobs, a guy who has never proven anything in college, let alone the NFL, will be an improvement over Ron Dayne, one of the most productive players in college history, then I feel safe in saying that Justin Beriault will be an improvement over Tony Dixon.

What do you think the chances are that Beriault starts? He was a sixth round pick remember, don't expect too much. Dayne is a good example of what college production gets you at the NFL level.

I don't know much about the Giants and their plans for 2005. They may have made moves that give them a chance to improve quite a bit on offense. What I do know is that it is very likely that Dallas will have improved dramatically on defense.

Actually they improved quite a bit on defense too.

And you accused me of having my "Dallas hating blinders" on?

[Eskimo]

I think this article has confused chemistry with talent, coaching and the ability to find complementary players at cheap prices who fit within your system.

Last year NE apparently lost one of their main OL leaders in Damien, had Ty Law acting like a cancer and imported cancer in the form of Dillon. Yet they defended their SB crown.

Ultimately, a lot of noise is being made about nothing with this TO situation. The Eagles won't redo his contract and he will show up and play just like Ty Law did last year. If he shows up and is disruptive, the Eagles will probably suspend him - just like what happened with Keyshawn in Tampa in 2003.

Even without TO the Eagles are still the class of the conference (so long as Westbrook shows up - and he will). The race for second place would seem to be between Carolina, Atlanta and Minnesota. Dallas is likely in the next tier of teams with New Orleans, Green Bay, Arizona, NYG, Detroit and Seattle. Expect SF, Chicago, Washington and TB to be in the caboose position again.

There is so much volatility in the league these days with player turnover and uncertain depth that it is almost impossible to prognositicate - what I have written is little more than a poorly informed guess. The only thing that is certain is the Eagles are still the class of this division and conference. That is a situation that I hope will reverse by next year.

[dargonking999]

He had seven catches for 160 yards.

He played at receiver in twelve games.

but who won the SB?

[kmd24]

Oh yeah, I love the Giants. :confused:


Eagles/Cowboys has always been a more heated rivalry than Eagles/Giants, despite the fact that Eagles have not been threatened by the Cowboys in quite some time. Anybody who offhandedly lists a few injured players and one free agent acquisition and suggests that these players constitute more of an improvement on offense than Dallas has made on defense has an agenda.


And they beat you by SIXTEEN, at HOME. Because Manning is the reason most Cowboy fans have given to prove that Dallas is the better team, I didn't feel the game without Manning was as relevant.


Perhaps it's not. Dallas had a different roster for that game, if you recall. For example, Julius Jones, who gained 149 yards on 29 carries in week 17 did not play in that game. Instead it was Eddie George, who was largely ineffective.


But they still won, with half their current team not playing (eleven starters, backup runningback and slot receiver).


Dallas was missing quite a few players too. Nice sidestep of my point about defensive meltdowns. If winning that game is all that matters, why are we even discussing this? Care to address why you think defensive meltdowns will continue to occur in 2005?

If Hunter and Glenn win that spot from Henry, you wasted some serious money.


Not the point. There is significant depth at CB that wasn't there last year. I'm beginning to think you are incapable of doing anything but putting up strawmen and digressing from the main point of contention. It's understandable of someone your age, but I hope you can mature a little in the very near future.


Blade was a fine player in 2003.


And the Dallas defense was much better in 2003 than 2004. The defense suffered when the play of Blade and others tailed off towards the end of the season. Thanks for helping support my point.


What do you think the chances are that Beriault starts? He was a sixth round pick remember, don't expect too much. Dayne is a good example of what college production gets you at the NFL level.


I don't think Beriault will start at FS. I actually think it will be Pete Hunter, but we'll see if he's willing.

But your closed mind missed the bigger point here. Your statement about Jacobs is pretty ludicrous. The guy's never done anything in college (and I should know, I'm an AU grad), and yet you are claiming he's an instant upgrade. He might look good in garbage time against Mississippi State running through 5 yard holes, but the holes close a lot faster in the NFL, and he won't be bigger than everyone on the field like he was in college.

If your argument is simply that Dayne is trash, well, so was Dixon.


Actually they improved quite a bit on defense too.


And Dallas improved on offense, but that wasn't the point being addressed, was it?

And you accused me of having my "Dallas hating blinders" on?

And I still do.

[AJM1613]

Eagles/Cowboys has always been a more heated rivalry than Eagles/Giants, despite the fact that Eagles have not been threatened by the Cowboys in quite some time. Anybody who offhandedly lists a few injured players and one free agent acquisition and suggests that these players constitute more of an improvement on offense than Dallas has made on defense has an agenda.

Really? Because I can honestly tell you I don't like the Giants any more than the Cowboys. Actually, the Cowboys have recently been pretty funny, four of the last five seasons with double digit losses and any time you say anything to a Dallas fan you get a "how many Super Bowls have you won?". The Redskins are just sad, so much hype in th offseason and then all their fan's hopes being crushed in week one or two every year.

New York is closer to where I live than Dallas so there are a lot more non-fairweather Giants fans than there are Cowboys fans around. Losing nine games in a row to New York prior to 2001 wasn't easy, and since then the games have been a lot closer. Also, they have players like Jeremy Shockey and Michael Strahan, players that have the ability to get into opposing fans heads. I would rather see the Giants struggle next season than the Cowboys. I would rather see Eli Manning bust than Drew Henson.

Let me see if I can let you see why I think this. Do I expect to change your mind? No, you have to have confidence in your team.

Eli Manning cannot be as bad as he was last season, he is a better player than that. I'm sure not playing Pittsburgh and Baltimore will help because he was terrible in those two games. If he is as bad as he was last season, then you probably will have the better team but if you look at almost every quarterback in year two there is a fairly big jump from year one.

Also, their offensive line looks solid. Kareem McKenzie is an upgrade from David Diehl. Diehl, who is moving back to guard, is an upgrade over Jason Whittle. Shaun O'Hara is also coming off an injury. Chris Snee was a very good right guard for them last season, so much so that Giants won't shut up about him. Luke Petitgout was terrible. Tiki was the most productive back in the NFL last season running behind a very shaky offensive line. Burress, Toomer and Carter is a pretty big upgrade over Hilliard, Tyree, and Taylor. Shockey is healthy again, something he wasn't all last season. And as I said, Jacobs HAS to be an upgrade over Dayne. You can't much worse of a short yardage back.

On defense you added four rookies, a cornerback who was one of the most burned defenders in the NFL last season and a good nose tackle. You also have some serious question marks at linebacker, defensive end and free safety, relying way too much on rookies. If Ware isn't ready for the leap from the Florida Atlantic and New Mexico State offensive lines to the ones in the NFL than you will have a problem rushing the passer from a 4-3 or a 3-4.

All this Giant defending is making me sick. :jints:

[kmd24]

There, that wasn't so hard, was it.

Most burned CB in the NFL? I think AdamJT has already disposed of that ridiculous notion. Henry may not be the next coming of Deion, but you need to consider who he's replacing.

Eli Manning cannot be as bad as he was last season, he is a better player than that. I'm sure not playing Pittsburgh and Baltimore will help because he was terrible in those two games. If he is as bad as he was last season, then you probably will have the better team but if you look at almost every quarterback in year two there is a fairly big jump from year one.

So your argument hinges pretty heavily on speculation about Manning's improvement, then? Surely you can see the hypocrisy there vis a vis your comment about relying on rookies.

How big were Boller's and Harrington's jumps from Year 1 to Year 2?

And as I said, Jacobs HAS to be an upgrade over Dayne. You can't much worse of a short yardage back.

Dayne had some pretty good games against Dallas. Jacobs will be lucky to produce similar results.

Should be fun to watch, either way.

[kartr]

And you do realize Manning beat you, right? He can't get much worse than he was last season.

A defensive lineup of three rookies and a group of older players that have been consistently declining over the past few seasons isn't exactly frightning. Strahan, Umenyiora, Tuck, Joseph, Robbins, Emmons, Pierce, Green, Allen, Peterson, Walker, Webster, Wilson, and Williams, on paper is a better and more experienced lineup.


No point in trying to reason with these guys, they've drank the cool-aid. They don't even think about the fact that the g-men now have Plaxigo Burress who
had his way with Terence Newman last year, or that Kareem McKenzie is the
Gints RT, or that they drafted 6-4, 250 lb RB, Brandon Jacobs, who runs a 4.50
40. We couldn't stop Tiki Barber by himself, how are we going to handle Jacobs
too.

[Muhast]

BOTTOM LINE- I dont give a **** what philly, Dallas, or Wash did LAST YEAR. The NFL is SOOO different each year. Also WHO CARES if Philly made the Super Bowl, and we didnt make the playoffs?

AJM does any of that matter? The bottomline in the NFL, if you dont WIN the superbowl your just as bad as all of the other teams besides the superbowl champ. Making the superbowl doesnt mean ****, WINNING the superbowl is all that matter in the Nfl.

So by my logic, Philly,Dallas,Indi,Min,Atl,Pitts keep the list going are ALL IN THE SAME BOAT regardless of off-season acquisitions and last years record untill they dethrone NE

[dargonking999]

No point in trying to reason with these guys, they've drank the cool-aid. They don't even think about the fact that the g-men now have Plaxigo Burress who
had his way with Terence Newman last year, or that Kareem McKenzie is the
Gints RT, or that they drafted 6-4, 250 lb RB, Brandon Jacobs, who runs a 4.50
40. We couldn't stop Tiki Barber by himself, how are we going to handle Jacobs
too.

i hope you were being sarcastic, but by look at your previous posts, i doubt you are,

first Henry was on one of the worst defense in the league that could do anything against Pitt. OL, WR are nothing if a QB cant sit in the pokcet long enough to see him.

Second who cares about a RT, their whole OL is sorry, our DL is so much more imporved, they got 1 player we got 4 players for the DL.

third we couldnt stop Tiki because our defense was sad, we have greatly improved our defense, tiki wont be running wild over anybody, adn second Jacobs is not JJ, he will not succed greatly as a rookie. So why should we worry about him.

[Manster68]

Really? Because I can honestly tell you I don't like the Giants any more than the Cowboys. Actually, the Cowboys have recently been pretty funny, four of the last five seasons with double digit losses and any time you say anything to a Dallas fan you get a "how many Super Bowls have you won?".

Well, until the Eagles WIN as many Super Bowls as Dallas, you will keep hearing this from us.

Also, don't think about bringing up "The past doesn't mean squat" crap either. Why? Because it does.

See, those who hide behind the "The past doesn't mean squat" philosophy are those who cheer for a team that has not had much success during their history.

So let's see

Philadelphia =
Established 1933 (73 seasons)
Played 1012 Games
Won 471
Lost 516
Tied 25
Winning Percentage 47.78%
Winning seasons 29 (in 73 seasons is 39.7%)
Division Titles 11 (in 73 seasons is 15.1%)
Years in Postseason 19 (in 73 seasons is 26.0%)
Postseason Games 31
Postseason Games Won 15
Postseason Games Lost 16
NFL/NFC Championship Games Played 9
NFL/NFC Championship Games Won 5
NFL/NFC Championship Games Lost 4
Super Bowls Played 2
Super Bowls Won None
Super Bowls Lost 2


Dallas =
Established 1960 (45 seasons)
Played 728 Games
Won 415
Lost 307
Tied 25
Winning Percentage 57.41%
Winning seasons 28 (in 45 seasons is 62.2%)
Division Titles 17 (in 45 seasons is 37.8%)
Years in Postseason 26 (in 45 seasons is 57.78%)
Postseason Games 54
Postseason Games Won 32
Postseason Games Lost 22
NFL/NFC Championship Games Played 16
NFL/NFC Championship Games Won 8
NFL/NFC Championship Games Lost 8
Super Bowls Played 8
Super Bowls Won 5
Super Bowls Lost 3

See, Philly may have the bragging right over the last 5 years, but Dallas has the bragging rights for eternity.

So which team's fans have enjoyed the expirience more? Dallas or Philly?

The future may look brighter for Philly right now, but there are no guarantees in life.

[big dog cowboy]

Actually, the Cowboys have recently been pretty funny, four of the last five seasons with double digit losses and any time you say anything to a Dallas fan you get a "how many Super Bowls have you won?".

You say that like it is a bad thing.

BTW, remind me again how many rings ya got.......... :lmao2:

[ravidubey]

I think this article has confused chemistry with talent, coaching and the ability to find complementary players at cheap prices who fit within your system.

Last year NE apparently lost one of their main OL leaders in Damien, had Ty Law acting like a cancer and imported cancer in the form of Dillon. Yet they defended their SB crown.

Ultimately, a lot of noise is being made about nothing with this TO situation. The Eagles won't redo his contract and he will show up and play just like Ty Law did last year. If he shows up and is disruptive, the Eagles will probably suspend him - just like what happened with Keyshawn in Tampa in 2003.

Even without TO the Eagles are still the class of the conference (so long as Westbrook shows up - and he will). The race for second place would seem to be between Carolina, Atlanta and Minnesota. Dallas is likely in the next tier of teams with New Orleans, Green Bay, Arizona, NYG, Detroit and Seattle. Expect SF, Chicago, Washington and TB to be in the caboose position again.

There is so much volatility in the league these days with player turnover and uncertain depth that it is almost impossible to prognositicate - what I have written is little more than a poorly informed guess. The only thing that is certain is the Eagles are still the class of this division and conference. That is a situation that I hope will reverse by next year.

This post was my opinion that chemistry is more of a deciding factor than ever now since teams can't stockpile talent. Having a franchise QB is a huge part of building chemistry because the offense revolves around the QB and the defense can't succeed if the offense doesn't consume the clock and score.

You can't ignore that Philadelphia has had too many chances in a row without winning. Has any team ever had more than 4 consecutive losing shots at a Superbowl victory? Buffalo had 4, and Dallas in the early 80's had 3. Surely the Bills were the same team on paper in 1994 that they were in 1993, so what happened? Pittsburgh finally got over the hump and San Diego came out of nowhere-- that's what happened, and neither of these teams on paper were as good as the Bills.

As for personnel conflicts affecting chemistry... in 1996, two big suspensions, Michael Irvin and Leon Lett, just killed the Cowboys. If you think that didn't affect team chemistry, you were high. Yes, technically Michael Irvin was only suspended for 6 weeks (5 games and a buy) and Leon Lett only missed the final 4 games and the playoffs but it made all the difference in the world. The literal absence of these players was a factor, but the Cowboys still went 3-2 in the games Irvin was suspended. It was the reactions of the teammates and coaches around them that had the grater impact. They left holes that other players and coaches didn't know how to fill or whether they should even try to fill.

With Owens it will be the same way-- he'll still play but the team around him won't accept him the same like they did the previous year. Something has been broken in Philly, and you won't see the results of the rift unti LATE in the year. The Eagles can still repair the damage, but it is not likely.

[TobiasEagle77]

I would like a little more of this thread to be devoted to the Vikings as opposed to the Eagles, perhaps looking at some of the issues I pointed out in my previous post.

Also, how does the Corey Chavous situation effect their chemistry?

[Alexander]

We couldn't stop Tiki Barber by himself, how are we going to handle Jacobs
too.

Yes.

I too have woke up in a cold sweat nightly since the draft screaming "Dear lord! What shall we do the Giants got Jacobs!!!!":eek:

[dargonking999]

I would like a little more of this thread to be devoted to the Vikings as opposed to the Eagles, perhaps looking at some of the issues I pointed out in my previous post.

Also, how does the Corey Chavous situation effect their chemistry?


With so many new faces on their D already it really cant make it that much worse, TO me the vikes dont have a good enough coach, to take a almost brand new team, switch to a running based attack, and rely on their D, an do much of anything. I dont see them doing much this year, maybe next year, when everything an everybody is broken in.

[Muhast]

Wierd, the VIKINGS decided to completely flip there team around. They want to Dominate on Defense, and Run. As opposed to Pass Heavy, Score, Give up points on Defense.

[Alexander]

As opposed to Pass Heavy, Score, Give up points on Defense.

Seriously.

It is like they got smart overnight or something.

[WoodysGirl]

Seriously.

It is like they got smart overnight or something.A rookie offensive coordinator will do that to you. You got a vet DC who's considered to be pretty decent. So if you're Tice and trying to hold onto your job longer than the next season, who do you rely on the most? The rookie OC or the vet DC? No brainer to me.

[dargonking999]

A rookie offensive coordinator will do that to you. You got a vet DC who's considered to be pretty decent. So if you're Tice and trying to hold onto your job longer than the next season, who do you rely on the most? The rookie OC or the vet DC? No brainer to me.

the problem there gonna run into was, ever since the got Moss they ahve been a pass untill the time runs out team, who can score the most points. Trying to go D adn run the ball takes more than 1 offseason of pickups and training. They just wont be able to do anything this year, to many new things.

[kmd24]

Yes.

I too have woke up in a cold sweat nightly since the draft screaming "Dear lord! What shall we do the Giants got Jacobs!!!!":eek:

It's hilarious. The same people that knock Demarcus Ware for playing against Florida Atlantic (despite the fact that he terrorized Marshall and lived in the LSU backfield when the Trojans visited Death Valley) think that Jacobs is someone to fear. The majority, if not all, of Troy's games were against Division 1A competition (Marshall, LSU, South Carolina, Missouri are among the teams they played in 2004).

Here's BJ's draft profile:

Weaknesses: A RB / FB 'tweener who may not have the pure speed or shiftiness needed to play running back in the pros...Doesn't deliver as many blows as he should...Has bounced around in college...Dominated in 2004, but it was against a lower level of competition.

I'm shaking in my boots. Sounds like Ron Dayne revisited, except that Dayne actually faced decent competition at Wisconsin. BTW, Jacobs started in only three of SIU's 2004 games. The majority, if not all, of SIU's games were against Division 1AA schools.

[ravidubey]

A rookie offensive coordinator will do that to you. You got a vet DC who's considered to be pretty decent. So if you're Tice and trying to hold onto your job longer than the next season, who do you rely on the most? The rookie OC or the vet DC? No brainer to me.

Tice backed into this; it was certainly not by design. This team can go all the way if the receivers step up because they have the conference's best passer. The biggest questions are chemistry-related: Can the defense gel? Who will emerge as the every-down running back? Can the Vikings be unselfish in the passing game?

[WoodysGirl]

Tice backed into this; it was certainly not by design. This team can go all the way if the receivers step up because they have the conference's best passer. The biggest questions are chemistry-related: Can the defense gel? Who will emerge as the every-down running back? Can the Vikings be unselfish in the passing game?Oh I totally agree Tice was backed into this scenario. Once he lost his OC and his #1 WR, he had to make a decision.

I think the RB-by-committee has worked for them in the past and I think they'll make that 3-headed or 4-headed monster work.

As for their WR corp, I don't think it'll be as much of an issue as people like to make it out to be. Granted it may not be as explosive w/o Moss, but I do think it will be very effective. Culpepper is the key to their passing game and he showed he could still spread the ball around to his other receivers last year when Moss went down.

The only chemistry-related question I see of your questions are related to their D, because they've added alot of new players. We have those same questions with our own D and my answer is that they should gel by the 4th or 5th game of the season.

[silver]

And you do realize Manning beat you, right? He can't get much worse than he was last season.

A defensive lineup of three rookies and a group of older players that have been consistently declining over the past few seasons isn't exactly frightning. Strahan, Umenyiora, Tuck, Joseph, Robbins, Emmons, Pierce, Green, Allen, Peterson, Walker, Webster, Wilson, and Williams, on paper is a better and more experienced lineup.

On paper the washington redskins would've won 5 straight superbowls.
that's why the play the games. on paper the eagles are unbeatable. and yet they've never won a superbowl ever. so again how are the giants better and more experienced than us on paper???

[ravidubey]

The Giants have always competed well in the past when everyone wrote them off (see 2000 Superbowl).

Toomer and Burress combined with Shockey Barber make for some dangerous skill position players, but the Giants really struggled to get the ball deep last year. Petitgout is good on the OL, but the rest are not as good and that has been a major problem. Manning is young, makes mistakes, and has not really flashed the talent that had him rated #1 overall-- what's most striking is his horrid 5+ yards per attempt.

They were also about the same as Dallas on defense-- middle of the pack and they added Pierce, Tuck, and Webster but are aging up front ans at safety. With Allen, Peterson, Alexander and Wilson at safety they are solid enough (Alexander is old) in the secondary; Pierce and Tuck were decent additions at LB but the remaining guys are average; the problems are the on DL where Strahan is ancient, they have average DT's, and they are really pinning their hopes on Osi Umenyiora. We'll see.

[kmd24]

and they are really pinning their hopes on Osi Umenyiora. We'll see.

Where did Umenyiora matriculate? Oh yeah, Troy.

Apparently that makes him a huge gamble.

[Alexander]

I'm shaking in my boots. Sounds like Ron Dayne revisited, except that Dayne actually faced decent competition at Wisconsin. BTW, Jacobs started in only three of SIU's 2004 games. The majority, if not all, of SIU's games were against Division 1AA schools.

What should really disturb you is the fact that some teams did not even see him as a RB at all and wanted to make a TE or H-back out of him.

[Alexander]

The Giants have always competed well in the past when everyone wrote them off (see 2000 Superbowl).

That was under a different head coach.

They folded like a cheap suit last season even though they were in the driver's seat halfway through the season. It was more fun to scapegoat Kurt Warner than it was to deal with the fact that that team and alot of it's core players have lacked heart for years.

[ravidubey]

That was under a different head coach.

They folded like a cheap suit last season even though they were in the driver's seat halfway through the season. It was more fun to scapegoat Kurt Warner than it was to deal with the fact that that team and alot of it's core players have lacked heart for years.

I agree. I think because of this very thing, though, that people tend to underestimate the Giants. I know I am guilty of just that every year.