Curran: Why can't we see that the Patriots are in a league of their own?

[shmessy]

AFCE has been a terrible division though compared to the rest. None of the teams in our divsion have had that "one off" great year like so many others. Steelers have been 15-1 and 12-4 several times. Mannings Colts.. then on top of that The Charges had come up with a 14-2, a 13-3, and a 12-4 year. Even Tennessee had a 13-3 year and a 12-4 year during this stretch of Brady's career.. So have the freaking Jaguars been 12-4. All of our AFCE competitions greatest years have been 9-7, 10-6, and 11-5 on 2 different occasions. The Pats never have any competition to win this division, and in the last 7 years the bye week.

EDIT:not to mention the Broncos. they were 13-3 with Jake Plummer once

Last time I checked (before last weekend) the AFCE this year had the 3rd best cumulative record of the 8 NFL divisions.

 

[shmessy]

This lament started after parcells left. The media here LOVED parcells. When he left guys like Borges, Will McDonough, Kevin mannix did their best to discredit any success the Pats had post parcells.....

Shank continues to be the worst.

He wrote a long screed a couple years ago as to how, neither Brady, nor Belichick nor Kraft were most responsible for the Patriots being where they are today. It was Parcells!!!!

I am NOT making that up.

 

[Wax Frog]

I disagree with that, I highly doubt that the Broncos got the consistent effort from opponents. It is one thing to be the reigning SB champion, where everyone knows luck, injuries, and timing play a huge role. Just being the reigning SB champion does not make you the measuring stick that other teams use to see where they stand. The Pats are the league's measuring stick, and have been for a while.

Back when I first started watching the NFL in the late 80s, I slowly came to realize that the 49ers were so good for so long that they became a kind of "filter" for NFC dominance - if they, with their consistent high level of excellence, didn't make it to the Super Bowl, the team good enough to beat them did.

Though things have evened out a bit, no doubt due to the holiest of holies Parity, I like that the Patriots have taken on that mantle for the last decade and a half

 

[Satchboogie3]

The Pats are the best. But not a single season has another AFCE team put up a once off transcendant season to win the division, like Jaguars 12-4 2006, Chargers 14-2 2006; 13-3 some other year, Tennessee 13-3.. Denver 13-3 2005..

Dolphins in 2008 was because Brady was out and we tied them.. We are great and it takes nothing away from us, but our greatness is not the absolute reason the AFCE is so bad. It has been very bad.

This is just faulty logic all around. The best division would be where all of the teams are strong, thus they have a pretty even divisional record, thus none 'standout', however they would have a great non-division record.

The fact is, the #1 team in the AFC and a wildcard team are coming out of the AFC East and the 0.567 win % is higher than all but the AFC West and NFC East. Balt, Indy, Cincy, Den, and SD might be 'sexier' teams, but Miami has been a much tougher team to face this year and I'd argue Buffalo as well.

Hell, look at all the AFC division and each year at least 2 of the 4 teams are a joke. CLE/CIN, OAK until this year with rotating SD/KC/Donkeys, the entire AFC south apart from the Manning Colts teams of the past. The AFC East is no different. Usually the Jets or Miami make at least an attempt at the division and make the playoffs. Going back to 2004, (13 seasons) 6 times there was a wildcard team (or the Miami division winners) from the AFCE. That is statistically right where it should be.