On September 17 2012 14:57 Shotcoder wrote: I know it looks horrible, but I really dont see anything wrong with that hit. It was completely between the numbers. Wasn't helmet to helmet, wasn't a chop block and wasn't an earhole. He just got laid the fuck out by not paying attention.
That's what happens when you let someone get their helmet right under your chin...
Because he is not valid to hit so he wasn't on guard, at least that's what the commentators said. Which lead to a very violent hit and not only that a flag was called against the cowboys for a late two handed touch of the ball returner, called under what was it unnecessary roughness =p.
Even though that was a clean hit, didn't hit the head and was all chest. Defenseless defender rule comes into play here. The guy wasn't watching and had no reaction to the hit until he woke up on the Cowboys sideline. This can go either way, it was a clean hit all the way up to this year. That's the key.
Was legal last year, not so much this year. It looks violent, because its well football. I don't consider him defenseless since he was taking part in the vicinity of the play. How else would you block him, Tate saw a chance went with it.
People crying about that hit need to go change their tampons. Seriously, stupid defender isn't looking for an oncoming blocker while a QB is making a run, and that's a cheap hit from the offensive player? How about this: play smarter, since this is football, and you're likely to get your shit wrecked at any moment.
On September 18 2012 09:56 Roffles wrote: Anyone else watching MNF to see 2 picks from Manning in 3 minutes?
lol yup... most overrated QB in NFL history. Regular season hero.
You don't watch football, do you?
On September 17 2012 05:41 xDaunt wrote: The 2012 Eagles -- the least deserving 2-0 team in history.
How so? Because Baltimore's offense utterly failed to capitalize on all the turnovers? Because Baltimore's D couldn't make a stop when it counted? Because Flacco couldn't keep his passes under control in the two minute drill? Or maybe they're not "deserving" because the Browns couldn't do any of that stuff either... The Eagles didn't play great football either of the first two games, but they played just well enough to win the games. The other teams didn't just lay down, they took the games from them. Amazingly, two weeks in a row, Vick stepped his game up when he needed to most, and led his team to a win.
On September 18 2012 15:42 On_Slaught wrote: NFC >>>> AFC
Overall, yes, but the MNF game is hardly indicative of the NFC being better. In reality, I think the game showed the opposite of what so many are chanting right now, and that's that the Falcons aren't really that much improved over last year.
The starting field position got worse in the late third and fourth quarter, but they still only managed 27 points with that field position. They had a couple of really good, long drives in the game, but it should have been completely out of reach by halftime. Instead, Denver was still in the game.
The turnovers weren't forced by the Falcons, either, they were just awful throws from Peyton. It was an uncharacteristic night that killed them early. The fumble was just another bad call from the refs, since Denver very obviously came away from the pile with the ball. There were three players left on the bottom of the pile, two Broncos players, and one Falcons player with his arm dug in between the two white jerseys. He was clearly not in possession of the ball at the end of the play, but apparently the refs aren't aware of how fumbles work at the NFL level, so the Falcons got the ball.
The Falcons D did a nice job disguising coverages, and confusing the Broncos protection schemes in the first half. It was, apparently, and unexpected wrinkle in the D, and screwed Peyton up pretty badly. That said, two of the throws were just horrible from Manning, one was just a great read from the DB. The defensive confusion may have caused him to make a somewhat poor read, but they were passes he has made in the past, and he just couldn't get them down tonight. Willis McGahee absolutely crushed their run D for most of the night as well. 22 carries for 113 yards, with a long of 31, and 2 TD's. Even if you take away the long run, he's still averaging about 4 ypc, which is a solid performance for a runner, and a bad performance for the D.
The Falcons run game was almost non-existent throughout the game, and Matt Ryan was getting away with a lot of really risky passes. The Broncos missed four or five really easy picks, Porter missed one that was an easy pick 6 (AGAIN). They didn't look anywhere near the level of the 49'ers. If Manning comes out and doesn't throw the ball to the wrong team three times in his first five attempts, and the Broncos don't get screwed on that fumble, then we're talking about an entirely different game. The Falcons didn't beat the Broncos, the Broncos handed the game to them.
That's not to take too much away from the Falcons, they made plays when it mattered most (the third down conversion to Jones, and the long run from Turner to seal it), but let's bring a little bit of reality into this. After the initial confusion wore off in the first quarter, we saw what I think was a much more clear picture of what this match up is. It was 21-17 for Denver in the last three quarters. This is hardly a dominant performance from Atlanta. If the fumble is called correctly, I don't think we're talking about a Falcons win tonight. Granted, it's hard to say exactly what would have happened, because a 20-0 cushion changes a lot of things about the way a team plays, but it probably doesn't change it a great deal in the first half, especially not when the other coaching staff sees number 18 on the other sidelines. They caught them early with some new wrinkles, and hats off to the Falcons for being able to do that, but let's not build this win into something more than it is. It was a good win, it was well played by the Falcons, and it was a well earned win, but it was not a domination, and it is not that telling of just how good they are. All that said, they probably are vastly improved over last year, since the pressure probably would have crumpled them last season.
I think that, after the first quarter, this is more or less what you'd expect out of a match up of two of the league's top teams.
There have been way too many terrible calls, but I also feel some players are taking the chance to blame their poor performance on the refs. Prime example is Flacco who threw a bunch of crap passes in the end of the game and then goes on tv like a cry baby and blame the refs.
On September 18 2012 21:56 Intact wrote: There have been way too many terrible calls, but I also feel some players are taking the chance to blame their poor performance on the refs. Prime example is Flacco who threw a bunch of crap passes in the end of the game and then goes on tv like a cry baby and blame the refs.
They'll do that with the real refs too :D The other big thing I've noticed that there is a lot less control on the field... both players getting away with extra "intensity" and then calls being made AFTER a player complaints (usually PI - and it does happen from time to time with the real refs, but not as much as I've seen last week).
Damn you Ryan, all those turnovers and you couldnt have thrown the fucking td instead of letting fatboy run in. I would have come back from 35 down if he did
I guy in my league is looking to trade TE tony gonzalez ( he already has jimmy graham). I am really desperate for a TE, because I have Fred Davis and he has really underperformed so far.
I was wondering what you guys think would be a fair trade. Here is my team
QB: Tony Romo, Matt Schaub
WR: Victor Cruz, Steve Smith(CAR), Stevie Johnson, Kenny Britt, Mike Williams
RB: Arian Foster, Ryan Mathews, Frank Gore, Fred Jackson, Ben Tate
Mike Williams maybe? Really need to know starting positions and scoring to tell you . The difference between 2 and 3 starting WR is big. A w/r/t flex changes things a lot (and makes Gonzo more valuable for him). No te flex means Gonzo is fairly useless for him and you can use that as leverage
Honestly, I think Davis comes around. He's got a rookie qb. Those guys tend to always use their TE.
Honestly, you don't have a lot of room to trade without potentially hurting yourself. YOu've got a lot of good backs, but three very injury prone dudes. Stevie Johnson and buffalo is just an iffy offense that is feast or famine. Britt is due for an arrest any day now, and Williams is the 2nd or third wideout on his team.
On September 17 2012 14:57 Shotcoder wrote: I know it looks horrible, but I really dont see anything wrong with that hit. It was completely between the numbers. Wasn't helmet to helmet, wasn't a chop block and wasn't an earhole. He just got laid the fuck out by not paying attention.
That's what happens when you let someone get their helmet right under your chin...
Because he is not valid to hit so he wasn't on guard, at least that's what the commentators said. Which lead to a very violent hit and not only that a flag was called against the cowboys for a late two handed touch of the ball returner, called under what was it unnecessary roughness =p.
Even though that was a clean hit, didn't hit the head and was all chest. Defenseless defender rule comes into play here. The guy wasn't watching and had no reaction to the hit until he woke up on the Cowboys sideline. This can go either way, it was a clean hit all the way up to this year. That's the key.
Was legal last year, not so much this year. It looks violent, because its well football. I don't consider him defenseless since he was taking part in the vicinity of the play. How else would you block him, Tate saw a chance went with it.
People crying about that hit need to go change their tampons. Seriously, stupid defender isn't looking for an oncoming blocker while a QB is making a run, and that's a cheap hit from the offensive player? How about this: play smarter, since this is football, and you're likely to get your shit wrecked at any moment.
On September 17 2012 05:41 xDaunt wrote: The 2012 Eagles -- the least deserving 2-0 team in history.
How so? Because Baltimore's offense utterly failed to capitalize on all the turnovers? Because Baltimore's D couldn't make a stop when it counted? Because Flacco couldn't keep his passes under control in the two minute drill? Or maybe they're not "deserving" because the Browns couldn't do any of that stuff either... The Eagles didn't play great football either of the first two games, but they played just well enough to win the games. The other teams didn't just lay down, they took the games from them. Amazingly, two weeks in a row, Vick stepped his game up when he needed to most, and led his team to a win.
On September 18 2012 15:42 On_Slaught wrote: NFC >>>> AFC
Overall, yes, but the MNF game is hardly indicative of the NFC being better. In reality, I think the game showed the opposite of what so many are chanting right now, and that's that the Falcons aren't really that much improved over last year.
The starting field position got worse in the late third and fourth quarter, but they still only managed 27 points with that field position. They had a couple of really good, long drives in the game, but it should have been completely out of reach by halftime. Instead, Denver was still in the game.
The turnovers weren't forced by the Falcons, either, they were just awful throws from Peyton. It was an uncharacteristic night that killed them early. The fumble was just another bad call from the refs, since Denver very obviously came away from the pile with the ball. There were three players left on the bottom of the pile, two Broncos players, and one Falcons player with his arm dug in between the two white jerseys. He was clearly not in possession of the ball at the end of the play, but apparently the refs aren't aware of how fumbles work at the NFL level, so the Falcons got the ball.
The Falcons D did a nice job disguising coverages, and confusing the Broncos protection schemes in the first half. It was, apparently, and unexpected wrinkle in the D, and screwed Peyton up pretty badly. That said, two of the throws were just horrible from Manning, one was just a great read from the DB. The defensive confusion may have caused him to make a somewhat poor read, but they were passes he has made in the past, and he just couldn't get them down tonight. Willis McGahee absolutely crushed their run D for most of the night as well. 22 carries for 113 yards, with a long of 31, and 2 TD's. Even if you take away the long run, he's still averaging about 4 ypc, which is a solid performance for a runner, and a bad performance for the D.
The Falcons run game was almost non-existent throughout the game, and Matt Ryan was getting away with a lot of really risky passes. The Broncos missed four or five really easy picks, Porter missed one that was an easy pick 6 (AGAIN). They didn't look anywhere near the level of the 49'ers. If Manning comes out and doesn't throw the ball to the wrong team three times in his first five attempts, and the Broncos don't get screwed on that fumble, then we're talking about an entirely different game. The Falcons didn't beat the Broncos, the Broncos handed the game to them.
That's not to take too much away from the Falcons, they made plays when it mattered most (the third down conversion to Jones, and the long run from Turner to seal it), but let's bring a little bit of reality into this. After the initial confusion wore off in the first quarter, we saw what I think was a much more clear picture of what this match up is. It was 21-17 for Denver in the last three quarters. This is hardly a dominant performance from Atlanta. If the fumble is called correctly, I don't think we're talking about a Falcons win tonight. Granted, it's hard to say exactly what would have happened, because a 20-0 cushion changes a lot of things about the way a team plays, but it probably doesn't change it a great deal in the first half, especially not when the other coaching staff sees number 18 on the other sidelines. They caught them early with some new wrinkles, and hats off to the Falcons for being able to do that, but let's not build this win into something more than it is. It was a good win, it was well played by the Falcons, and it was a well earned win, but it was not a domination, and it is not that telling of just how good they are. All that said, they probably are vastly improved over last year, since the pressure probably would have crumpled them last season.
I think that, after the first quarter, this is more or less what you'd expect out of a match up of two of the league's top teams.
That guys post was obviously hyperbole, but in spite of that the Eagles have no business being 2-0. It's really easy to just say "oh, the other team played like shit" and write off the Eagles performance, but ultimately, they were so horrible in week one. I feel confident saying they'd have lost to just about any other team in the league, short of a Brandon Weeden led club. Against the Ravens they really did not outplay Baltimore at all. Some poor officiating certainly helped their case. I've really felt Philadelphia's offense has been exceptionally underwhelming, and their play as a whole has not impressed me. Conversely, the other 3 teams in the East at 1-1 have looked much more impressive. (Dallas was terrrrible in Seattle, but still looked about as good as the Eagles did in week 1, Seattle > Cleveland). Imho, Washington has looked like the best team in that division.
And I think the NFC is clearly better than the AFC. MNF didn't show that, but a whole bunch of other games have. The Patriots losing to Arizona is a fairly strong indicator (yes, Arizona is much improved, but they're not an NFC playoff team). The play off the 49ers is off the charts, then you have the Packers and Falcons behind them. That doesn't even include the NFC East or the improved Seahawks club. The Bears are still hit or miss right now, but I don't see them playing much worse than any of the AFC teams for the most part.
In fact, the only AFC team that looks impressive right now to me is Houston, which may be the only AFC team I see being able to beat the 49ers.
Love the Niners, but they've not played any good D's yet. The Texans are great all over, and can legitimately run or pass.
I think the NFCE is ridiculously overrated. Each team has massive holes. The Giants are still the best I think because that passing attack + the line can definitely win a lot of games based on talent alone, but they are still very flawed. That d, outside of the line, bleh. The oline is rapidly deteriorating. Honestly, Green Bay looks very, very similar to this team, except with an even better passing attack and not as impressive pass rush. Both have dumpster fires in the secondary though. But when you can get up ahead early, that is mitigated.
The Boys, I think their D is improved, but still average. They really just need competent coaching or something, I don't even know.
The Skin are still not there yet, and they just lost two of their best D players for the year.
The eagles, Reid insists on driving his offense through an injury and turnover prone, overrated qb instead of a very talented and dynamic back. Keep passing 50 something times a game you fat retard. I also want to see that D against a more competent offense before everyone gets all giddy about it being improved enough for them to be a legit contender.
On September 18 2012 23:04 Durp wrote: In fact, the only AFC team that looks impressive right now to me is Houston, which may be the only AFC team I see being able to beat the 49ers.
I agree that Houston is one of the top teams in the AFC, but I'm going to withhold judgment until they play a real team. Beating up on Jacksonville and Miami doesn't really mean anything. It certainly isn't even comparable to the Niners beating Green Bay and Detroit.
On September 18 2012 23:01 QuanticHawk wrote: Mike Williams maybe? Really need to know starting positions and scoring to tell you . The difference between 2 and 3 starting WR is big. A w/r/t flex changes things a lot (and makes Gonzo more valuable for him). No te flex means Gonzo is fairly useless for him and you can use that as leverage
Honestly, I think Davis comes around. He's got a rookie qb. Those guys tend to always use their TE.
Honestly, you don't have a lot of room to trade without potentially hurting yourself. YOu've got a lot of good backs, but three very injury prone dudes. Stevie Johnson and buffalo is just an iffy offense that is feast or famine. Britt is due for an arrest any day now, and Williams is the 2nd or third wideout on his team.
It is ppr in a 10 man league. Gonzalez is pretty useless for him, because there is no flex position. It is 3 wr, 2rb and 1 TE. He got graham in a trade. Also he is pretty weak at running back. This is the scores and settings for offense.
Offense League Value Yahoo! Default Value Passing Yards 25 yards per point Passing Touchdowns 4 Interceptions -1 Rushing Yards 10 yards per point Rushing Touchdowns 6 Receptions 1 Reception Yards 10 yards per point Reception Touchdowns 6
This is his team:
QB: Aaron Rodgers
WR: Roddy White, Hakeem Nicks, Reggie Wayne, Kevin Olgetree
RB: Maurice Jones-Drew, Michael Bush, Jamaal Charles, Toby Gerhart, Alfred Morris
The 49ers are definately the team to beat this year. And we all know who's gonna win the Super Bowl 49 next year. It's pretty obvious. "hint hint". I just remembered watching ESPN a few weeks ago and remember Skip Bayless saying the 49ers playing in one of the softest schedule this year. The guy doesn't know much about football does he? 49ers schedule includes: Greenbay- Detroit- Jets- Giants- Seattle 2x- Arizona 2x- New England- and Saints. Tell me somebody if that's a soft schedule....
On September 19 2012 08:09 Damiani wrote: The 49ers are definately the team to beat this year. And we all know who's gonna win the Super Bowl 49 next year. It's pretty obvious. "hint hint". I just remembered watching ESPN a few weeks ago and remember Skip Bayless saying the 49ers playing in one of the softest schedule this year. The guy doesn't know much about football does he? 49ers schedule includes: Greenbay- Detroit- Jets- Giants- Seattle 2x- Arizona 2x- New England- and Saints. Tell me somebody if that's a soft schedule....
Eh, I'm not convinced that Seattle and Arizona are actually good teams, and the Jets are coming off an 8-8 season. Only 5 games on the 49ers schedule are against teams that made the playoffs last season. This is a new season, but these teams have to prove themselves for more than 2 games before that schedule looks tough.
To some extent though there is no such thing as a soft NFL schedule.
When Skip Bayless said that, it was thought of as a soft schedule. Still is. 49ers aren't going to take anybody by surprise this year, everyone knows what they are capable of. Perhaps the NFC West teams have exceeded expectations so far, but Arizona isn't a challenge, neither are the Jets. For the teams you named, there are games like, Vikings, Rams, Dolphins and Bills.
I'm sitting here debating if I should keep Michael Turner or dump him for Mikel Leshoure. The fact he got a DUI and his poor performances really aren't helping him keep a roster spot.
Busy day for the Patriots. Ended up signing Kellen Winslow, cut Greg Salas and re-signed Deion Branch.
Most amusing quote about replacement refs.
They're like fans, kind of though. I'll be honest, they're like fans. One of the refs was talking about his fantasy team, like 'McCoy, come on, I need you for my fantasy.' Ahhh, what?!
On September 18 2012 17:46 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:
On September 17 2012 15:10 Irave wrote:
On September 17 2012 15:05 semantics wrote:
On September 17 2012 14:57 Shotcoder wrote: I know it looks horrible, but I really dont see anything wrong with that hit. It was completely between the numbers. Wasn't helmet to helmet, wasn't a chop block and wasn't an earhole. He just got laid the fuck out by not paying attention.
That's what happens when you let someone get their helmet right under your chin...
Because he is not valid to hit so he wasn't on guard, at least that's what the commentators said. Which lead to a very violent hit and not only that a flag was called against the cowboys for a late two handed touch of the ball returner, called under what was it unnecessary roughness =p.
Even though that was a clean hit, didn't hit the head and was all chest. Defenseless defender rule comes into play here. The guy wasn't watching and had no reaction to the hit until he woke up on the Cowboys sideline. This can go either way, it was a clean hit all the way up to this year. That's the key.
Was legal last year, not so much this year. It looks violent, because its well football. I don't consider him defenseless since he was taking part in the vicinity of the play. How else would you block him, Tate saw a chance went with it.
People crying about that hit need to go change their tampons. Seriously, stupid defender isn't looking for an oncoming blocker while a QB is making a run, and that's a cheap hit from the offensive player? How about this: play smarter, since this is football, and you're likely to get your shit wrecked at any moment.
On September 18 2012 10:03 xrapture wrote:
On September 18 2012 09:56 Roffles wrote: Anyone else watching MNF to see 2 picks from Manning in 3 minutes?
lol yup... most overrated QB in NFL history. Regular season hero.
You don't watch football, do you?
On September 17 2012 05:41 xDaunt wrote: The 2012 Eagles -- the least deserving 2-0 team in history.
How so? Because Baltimore's offense utterly failed to capitalize on all the turnovers? Because Baltimore's D couldn't make a stop when it counted? Because Flacco couldn't keep his passes under control in the two minute drill? Or maybe they're not "deserving" because the Browns couldn't do any of that stuff either... The Eagles didn't play great football either of the first two games, but they played just well enough to win the games. The other teams didn't just lay down, they took the games from them. Amazingly, two weeks in a row, Vick stepped his game up when he needed to most, and led his team to a win.
On September 18 2012 15:42 On_Slaught wrote: NFC >>>> AFC
Overall, yes, but the MNF game is hardly indicative of the NFC being better. In reality, I think the game showed the opposite of what so many are chanting right now, and that's that the Falcons aren't really that much improved over last year.
The starting field position got worse in the late third and fourth quarter, but they still only managed 27 points with that field position. They had a couple of really good, long drives in the game, but it should have been completely out of reach by halftime. Instead, Denver was still in the game.
The turnovers weren't forced by the Falcons, either, they were just awful throws from Peyton. It was an uncharacteristic night that killed them early. The fumble was just another bad call from the refs, since Denver very obviously came away from the pile with the ball. There were three players left on the bottom of the pile, two Broncos players, and one Falcons player with his arm dug in between the two white jerseys. He was clearly not in possession of the ball at the end of the play, but apparently the refs aren't aware of how fumbles work at the NFL level, so the Falcons got the ball.
The Falcons D did a nice job disguising coverages, and confusing the Broncos protection schemes in the first half. It was, apparently, and unexpected wrinkle in the D, and screwed Peyton up pretty badly. That said, two of the throws were just horrible from Manning, one was just a great read from the DB. The defensive confusion may have caused him to make a somewhat poor read, but they were passes he has made in the past, and he just couldn't get them down tonight. Willis McGahee absolutely crushed their run D for most of the night as well. 22 carries for 113 yards, with a long of 31, and 2 TD's. Even if you take away the long run, he's still averaging about 4 ypc, which is a solid performance for a runner, and a bad performance for the D.
The Falcons run game was almost non-existent throughout the game, and Matt Ryan was getting away with a lot of really risky passes. The Broncos missed four or five really easy picks, Porter missed one that was an easy pick 6 (AGAIN). They didn't look anywhere near the level of the 49'ers. If Manning comes out and doesn't throw the ball to the wrong team three times in his first five attempts, and the Broncos don't get screwed on that fumble, then we're talking about an entirely different game. The Falcons didn't beat the Broncos, the Broncos handed the game to them.
That's not to take too much away from the Falcons, they made plays when it mattered most (the third down conversion to Jones, and the long run from Turner to seal it), but let's bring a little bit of reality into this. After the initial confusion wore off in the first quarter, we saw what I think was a much more clear picture of what this match up is. It was 21-17 for Denver in the last three quarters. This is hardly a dominant performance from Atlanta. If the fumble is called correctly, I don't think we're talking about a Falcons win tonight. Granted, it's hard to say exactly what would have happened, because a 20-0 cushion changes a lot of things about the way a team plays, but it probably doesn't change it a great deal in the first half, especially not when the other coaching staff sees number 18 on the other sidelines. They caught them early with some new wrinkles, and hats off to the Falcons for being able to do that, but let's not build this win into something more than it is. It was a good win, it was well played by the Falcons, and it was a well earned win, but it was not a domination, and it is not that telling of just how good they are. All that said, they probably are vastly improved over last year, since the pressure probably would have crumpled them last season.
I think that, after the first quarter, this is more or less what you'd expect out of a match up of two of the league's top teams.
That guys post was obviously hyperbole, but in spite of that the Eagles have no business being 2-0. It's really easy to just say "oh, the other team played like shit" and write off the Eagles performance, but ultimately, they were so horrible in week one. I feel confident saying they'd have lost to just about any other team in the league, short of a Brandon Weeden led club. Against the Ravens they really did not outplay Baltimore at all. Some poor officiating certainly helped their case. I've really felt Philadelphia's offense has been exceptionally underwhelming, and their play as a whole has not impressed me. Conversely, the other 3 teams in the East at 1-1 have looked much more impressive. (Dallas was terrrrible in Seattle, but still looked about as good as the Eagles did in week 1, Seattle > Cleveland). Imho, Washington has looked like the best team in that division.
And I think the NFC is clearly better than the AFC. MNF didn't show that, but a whole bunch of other games have. The Patriots losing to Arizona is a fairly strong indicator (yes, Arizona is much improved, but they're not an NFC playoff team). The play off the 49ers is off the charts, then you have the Packers and Falcons behind them. That doesn't even include the NFC East or the improved Seahawks club. The Bears are still hit or miss right now, but I don't see them playing much worse than any of the AFC teams for the most part.
In fact, the only AFC team that looks impressive right now to me is Houston, which may be the only AFC team I see being able to beat the 49ers.
Poor officiating effected both teams equally in the Ravens/Eagles game. That game came down to two things: Mike Vick making passes and runs when it mattered, and Joe Flacco choking under pressure again, then crying for flags that would never get thrown. At least some of Flacco's poor play was due to good defense from the Eagles. Granted, that INT he threw was just a pathetic attempt. I didn't even know who he was throwing that to during that play. The Eagles D kept them in that game, and that shouldn't be taken away from them.
As far as AFC v NFC: imo, the NFC is deeper, but the top teams are about even. Anyone can lose one game to a subpar team, so let's not put too much stock into NE vs Arizona (that's not to mention that they lost Hernandez early on, and he's a pretty big part of their offense).
If you take SF vs Hou, Atlanta v Denver, NE v GB, Detroit v Baltimore, Chicago vs Pitt, NYG vs SD and so on, they're probably fairly evenly matched games. I think most of them would go the way the ATL/DEN game went, which was a competitive game.
There are definitely fewer teams in the NFC than the AFC that are just plain awful. The Jaguars, Chiefs, Raiders, Titans, and Browns are probably all going to pick in the top 10. Whereas on the NFC's end, there isn't one team I can pick and say they're pretty much guaranteed a top 10 pick. I think the Redskins are going to be hurting after the loss of two good defenders for the season, so they might end up in the top 10 again... The Vikings probably will, maybe the Rams (though they look much improved), and the Saints have looked like shit so far. There are more up and coming teams, teams that have been rebuilding well for the last 2-3 seasons in the NFC. The AFC was the powerhouse a couple seasons back, and I think we're still in the shift of power.
EPT
