Predict the biggest collapses of 2006

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Fri May 12, 2006 3:21 pm

In the spirit of Punu's thread about who will make a turn-around for the better in '06, let's discuss who will make a turn-around for the worse next year! Like Philly ('04 NFC Champs) and the NY Jets (made '04 playoffs) last year, some teams go way down as other teams rise. Of the 12 '05 Playoff teams, name at least two who aren't coming back. The '05 Playoff teams are:

NFC
Seattle
NY Giants
Washington
Carolina
Chicago
Tampa Bay

AFC
Pittsburgh
New England
Denver
Jacksonville
Indy
Cincy

My picks would have to be the Giants and Tampa. Both teams over-achieved in a big way last year, and both have young QBs who will likely struggle. Plus, both play in divisions which should be tougher next year. For example, the 'skins play the Giants twice, so that's two losses for NY right there!

Let's hear your predictions for next season's collapses!

skinsRin · Post by **skinsRin** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:07 am

NFC Bears
AFC Cincy(if palmer can't play) or Pitt.

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:49 am

NFC
Chicago (Good defense, but I just can't seem them stringing two good years together)

AFC
Indy (They're gonna find out really quickly just how much they're gonna miss Edge.)

leatherhead 377 · Post by **leatherhead 377** » Sat May 13, 2006 11:06 am

J'ville and T.B

Over-achieved and lack of consistency..

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:08 pm

In the NFC I'm going to say New York and Chicago.

New York has a crappy QB, a dreadful secondary, and the hardest schedule in football. Last year they only made the playoffs by playing by far the easiest schedule in their division and having nine home games.

The Bears offense is really bad.

redskins12287 · Post by **redskins12287** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:13 pm

NFC-TB, they have not done anything to aid an aging D, still good, but it seems like they gradually loose a little every year since they won the super bowl and havent dont much about it.

AFC-Indy, James will be missed.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:51 pm

I'm going to call the Seahawks. That might be more of a hope than a guess. . .but there it is.

I'll also say the NY Giants. Dallas is going to do better this year, as will Philadelphia. Like Mursilis said, they've already got two losses coming from the 'Skins. . .no way they repeat their success.

air_hog · Post by **air_hog** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:13 pm

Justice Hog wrote:NFC
Chicago (Good defense, but I just can't seem them stringing two good years together)

AFC
Indy (They're gonna find out really quickly just how much they're gonna miss Edge.)

Exactly

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Sun May 14, 2006 9:52 pm

TB and the Pats (but the pats come back the next year and play the skins in the superbowl)

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon May 15, 2006 10:02 am

hkHog wrote:In the NFC I'm going to say New York and Chicago.

New York has a crappy QB, a dreadful secondary, and the hardest schedule in football. Last year they only made the playoffs by playing by far the easiest schedule in their division and having nine home games.

The Bears offense is really bad.

Drivel.

I can't stand when someone says a division rival had an "easier schedule". Aside from two games, they all play the same teams.

If the Giants had an "easy schedule", so did you.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon May 15, 2006 10:36 am

Primetime42 wrote:
hkHog wrote:In the NFC I'm going to say New York and Chicago.

New York has a crappy QB, a dreadful secondary, and the hardest schedule in football. Last year they only made the playoffs by playing by far the easiest schedule in their division and having nine home games.

The Bears offense is really bad.
Drivel.

I can't stand when someone says a division rival had an "easier schedule". Aside from two games, they all play the same teams.

If the Giants had an "easy schedule", so did you.

You could make the case though...

The Gints played NO and Minny at home in those two games that you speak of... ttiT played the Lions and Panthers, Philly got Vick and Farve and we played Chi and TB. One game at home, 1 on the road (everyone in the Div. but the Gints)
New York played on the road once in the first 5 and took week five off before playing in Texas. Philly, Wash and ttiT all had multiple back to back road games and the Giants had only such limitation, it came during weeks 15 and 16.

I'm not going to say they had a easier schedule but because the schedules are so close doesn't mean on can't be harder than the other.

That team in Texas played the 9ers before they knew how bad the were but by the time they played the Giants they couldn't believe how bad they were. (was't the same team, although it's the same team that's on both schedules).

It good be argued that they had a easier schedule, but I think people are still Ticked about the extra home game and automaticaly say the extra home game made the schedule easy.

As far as who'll take a dip this year, I'll say the Jags will have a hard time matching last years 12-4 record. Did you see the schedule they played last year :lol:

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon May 15, 2006 11:23 am

1niksder wrote:
Primetime42 wrote:
hkHog wrote:In the NFC I'm going to say New York and Chicago.

New York has a crappy QB, a dreadful secondary, and the hardest schedule in football. Last year they only made the playoffs by playing by far the easiest schedule in their division and having nine home games.

The Bears offense is really bad.
Drivel.

I can't stand when someone says a division rival had an "easier schedule". Aside from two games, they all play the same teams.

If the Giants had an "easy schedule", so did you.

You could make the case though...

The Gints played NO and Minny at home in those two games that you speak of... ttiT played the Lions and Panthers, Philly got Vick and Farve and we played Chi and TB. One game at home, 1 on the road (everyone in the Div. but the Gints)
New York played on the road once in the first 5 and took week five off before playing in Texas. Philly, Wash and ttiT all had multiple back to back road games and the Giants had only such limitation, it came during weeks 15 and 16.

I'm not going to say they had a easier schedule but because the schedules are so close doesn't mean on can't be harder than the other.

That team in Texas played the 9ers before they knew how bad the were but by the time they played the Giants they couldn't believe how bad they were. (was't the same team, although it's the same team that's on both schedules).

It good be argued that they had a easier schedule, but I think people are still Ticked about the extra home game and automaticaly say the extra home game made the schedule easy.

As far as who'll take a dip this year, I'll say the Jags will have a hard time matching last years 12-4 record. Did you see the schedule they played last year

The extra home game is a legit argument for sure...but I'm still not biting on the other thing.

The other two teams you play are determined based on how you did the season before, and like was the case with Dallas in 2003, did you win 10 games because the schedule was weak or was the schedule "weak" because you won 10 games?

You get me here?

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Mon May 15, 2006 1:43 pm

Pukes in the NFC

Pitt in the AFC

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon May 15, 2006 1:48 pm

You wish on both. :lol:

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Mon May 15, 2006 2:30 pm

A bridge
A building ... maybe a pyramid ... Helen Thomas might eventually finish imploding but that might not count as a collapse per se

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon May 15, 2006 3:22 pm

NFC: Redskins
AFC: Broncos

Just a hunch.

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Mon May 15, 2006 5:08 pm

Primetime42 wrote:
hkHog wrote:In the NFC I'm going to say New York and Chicago.

New York has a crappy QB, a dreadful secondary, and the hardest schedule in football. Last year they only made the playoffs by playing by far the easiest schedule in their division and having nine home games.

The Bears offense is really bad.
Drivel.

I can't stand when someone says a division rival had an "easier schedule". Aside from two games, they all play the same teams.

If the Giants had an "easy schedule", so did you.

It's a simple fact. In the Sagarin Ratings the Giants had the 17th hardest schedule. In comparison, the Redskins was the 3rd hardest, the Eagles had the 6th hardest, and the Cowboys were 7th. If you look simply at the opponents records the Redskins also played a much harder schedule as well.

I am not just expressing an opinion by saying that the Giants had the easiest schedule, I am expressing a fact! Plus they had an extra home game, it doesn't get much easier than that. In the NFL, that is a HUGE advantage to have over the rest of the teams in your division.

Finally, we were 5-1 in the division while they were only 4-2. We are clealry the best team in the division and things will not change this year! :wink:

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon May 15, 2006 11:02 pm

hkHog wrote:It's a simple fact. In the Sagarin Ratings the Giants had the 17th hardest schedule.

hkHog wrote:I am not just expressing an opinion by saying that the Giants had the easiest schedule, I am expressing a fact!

Why didn't you say this in the begining, I was trying to get Pt42 to see your point of veiw, but this is from the Sagarin Ratings - of course this fact alone changes everything.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Tue May 16, 2006 8:37 am

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:NFC: Redskins

Just a hunch.

From Redeemed, even!!
:hmm:

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Tue May 16, 2006 9:30 am

Mursilis wrote:
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:NFC: Redskins

Just a hunch.

From Redeemed, even!!

Considering my Hognostications record last season, this probably means we go UNDEFEATED!!!! :lol:

John Manfreda · Post by **John Manfreda** » Wed May 17, 2006 1:58 pm

Washington, actually I just want someone to say it. But for real its Jacksonville.