Grade your team's 2009 season.

[z Revis]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

Winning the divisions means nothing. Especially when you lose in the first round of the playoffs at home. The goal is not to win the division the goal is to win the Super Bowl.

For some teams it is to win the division. Not every team has the same goals. You think the Lions were thinking about the Super Bowl in training camp? Probably not. Some teams set their goals on the SB, others set them on the division, others just want to make the Playoffs, etc.

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by z Revis

For some teams it is to win the division. Not every team has the same goals. You think the Lions were thinking about the Super Bowl in training camp? Probably not. Some teams set their goals on the SB, others set them on the division, others just want to make the Playoffs, etc.

My point exactly. However if you read the post I replied to, he pointed out that I gave my team an F despite winning the division. For my team at this point, winning the division simply isn't good enough.

[Tbo24]

A

Would have been an A+ had we won the only game that matters.

[z Revis]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

My point exactly. However if you read the post I replied to, he pointed out that I gave my team an F despite winning the division. For my team at this point, winning the division simply isn't good enough.

Yeah I was going to add something along those lines at the end. For a team such as the Chargers, clearly winning the division isn't good enough. They win it every year.

[Scottdau]

Saints A+



Vikings A

[mvb34]

Quote: Originally Posted by CreatineKasey

Vikings F?! Who says that.... seriously that was the best squad that MN has seen since 1998. Get outta here. I'd give the Vikings a B+. Steelers - I'd give them a C. They had success, but utterly failed in the 4th quarter of games. Polamalu and Smith's presence was missed more than I expected. The explosiveness on D was lacking overall. This team got lazy, which explains the losses to inferior opponents. It was nice to see Mendenhall come into his own, and watch another weapon develop in Mike Wallace.

I gave an F,, its not about having the best squads.. its about winning championships especially after your coach runs to the airport like a little girl to pickup a free agent acquisition saying this was peace for the Super Bowl..

[Evan_OS]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

My point exactly. However if you read the post I replied to, he pointed out that I gave my team an F despite winning the division. For my team at this point, winning the division simply isn't good enough.

I understand. If the Titans won the division every year I would think the same.

[allBthere]

Quote: Originally Posted by z Revis

As far as the comebacks - we always have comebacks. As far as the defense - It's your opinion, but personally I thought this year we had the best defense we've ever had aside from maybe 2005. As far as Manning - he's epic every year. lol. And the running game - Meh, with the way we play, we don't absolutely need one.

having the best defence doesn't mean it's good compared to other NFL teams. And not having a running game is not meh if you want a lock to be in the S-bowl.

Basically the colts rely too much on Manning.

Are you actually arguing against improving the D and Rushing? We get those two things even just a bit better and it's BAM! time.