The argument about which team is the best in the NFC boils down...

[what you talkin about]

howdumbareyou wrote:

Wow, Brett Favre that logic is just about as smart as saying if we didn't play the Steelers you would be undefeated. Sorry you are the moron whether you like it or not you have to take the whole record you can't just pick and pan the games you like each team has played eight games and that's what you go by.

EXACTLY ..... by using this clowns backwards logic the final overall records will be decreased by 7 in the losses but the Vikes then will gain 1 in the win column of the overall records because they have lost and New Orleans hasn't .... still , New Orleans has had a tougher schedule

[FudgePackerKilla]

Tough to decide who the better team is. I think the only way the Vikes win a game in a neutral stadium right now would be if they could get to Brees in about 2.5 seconds like they did Sharon Rodgers.

If the Saints line can handle our pass rush, Brees torches us, plain and simple, with or without Winfield.

This is a team we dont match up well against and to be honest, they scare the bejesus out me.

[what you talkin about]

Brett Favre wrote:

<quoted text>
Again, it is YOU who are wrong, pal.
It is inaccurate to beat a team, stick them with an extra loss on their record, then downgrade your own team for playing someone with one extra loss on their record, when YOU are the one who gave it to them.
Ask the NFL front offices how their statiticians do it.
And stop sniffing your sister's panties, Packer fan.

would you please quit posting you q .u .e .e .r little moron .... the tough talking guy behind his keyboard syndrome .... your logic is backwards .... each team has 7 wins so it means the same anyway for overall losses for the opponents .... now go away you dumb PUNK

[Mojo]

murda capital UHERDME wrote:

<quoted text>
haaaaa look at the weak puzzzy from minnesota who has a southerner leading his viqueen football team, you cant win without southern athletes, nobody in feggotazz minnesota can play football for shyt, u have to come down SOUTH to get real athletes, u fat pale chumps would get destroyed down here where its real, go make a snowman u losers, u couldnt hang for a second in the N.O. u HERD

...uuus gots molds on ur brains..

[ponch]

Possibly the dumbest thing I've read today... give one example of how Peterson is overrated? And hate to break it to you but the Saints will only have one playoff game this year and it will result in a loss to an NFC EAST team

SAINTS over Vagina-kins wrote:

Nice stretch with the statistics, but the Saints are solidly better than the purple puddins. You have Peterson (overrated) and Favre (over-the-hill). If you have to come to NO for the game, do not even waste your time...or ours. You would lose by 14 in Minnesota and by 3 TDs in NO.
Not even close.

[ponch]

Childress is the worst coach in the NFL??? give me a break, he's no Champion... but he has improved this team every year!

dch6859 wrote:

In the playoffs there are no easy games and the difference is COACHING and Childress is the worst Head Coach in the NFL. He has single handed taken the best running back to come into the league in years and turned him into just an average back with his PATHETIC running offense. Lets hope Wilf recognizes this after a 1 and done and he fires him.

[vikings fan]

The Saints will choke in the nfc championship game.
Farve has more experience than Brees in the playoffs.
The Vikings also has a better rush defense.

[vikings fan]

That's right. Childress has improve every year.
Whoever said Peterson is over rated is a freakin IDIOT. The best playmaker in the LEAGUE.

[treking]

The Vikings went into the Superdome last year and beat the Saints. They shut down Drew Bress. If it wasn't for Reggie Bush and his to punt returns the game wouldn't have been close.

[treking]

Brees

[eric113]

murda capital UHERDME wrote:

<quoted text>
haaaaa look at the weak puzzzy from minnesota who has a southerner leading his viqueen football team, you cant win without southern athletes, nobody in feggotazz minnesota can play football for shyt, u have to come down SOUTH to get real athletes, u fat pale chumps would get destroyed down here where its real, go make a snowman u losers, u couldnt hang for a second in the N.O. u HERD

And this guy won the New Orleans Spelling Bee!

[Huge Jazz]

We'll soon find out who is the better team when they meet in the playoffs. Until then the only ones who wrote this article to get get all the fan in an artificial lather.

[truth]

I'd say it's pretty obvious that the Saints are the better team right now, Jerad Allen has really only put up sacks when he's played the Packers, Petersons not the RB he has been in the past. Not too mention the porus Vikings pass defense, and has had problems putting the bottom teams in the NFL away until this is corrected they are not an elite team.

[40for60]

truth wrote:

I'd say it's pretty obvious that the Saints are the better team right now, Jerad Allen has really only put up sacks when he's played the Packers, Petersons not the RB he has been in the past. Not too mention the porus Vikings pass defense, and has had problems putting the bottom teams in the NFL away until this is corrected they are not an elite team.

I agree, the 7-1 mark is just an illusion.
Where does topix find doorknobs like you?

[kurt]

There's really no question which team is better...

The Saints have played much better competition - none of the Vikings opponents are over .500, with the exception of Pittsburgh. And who did the Vikes lose to? Yup...the one team that's better than average on their schedule.

Prediction for end-of-season records:
Saints 15-1 (either Dallas or NE)
Vikings 12-4 (Arizona, Cincinatti,@ Chicago...maybe NYG)

[Archangel]

40for60 wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree, the 7-1 mark is just an illusion.
Where does topix find doorknobs like you?

Easy: greenbaypressgazette.com

[40for60]

Archangel wrote:

<quoted text>
Easy: greenbaypressgazette.com

LOL, I can't go there Arch!!
I can't bear to see grown men cry. LOL

[truth]

Well look it's the kool-ade drinking 40for60 and Archangel instead of slinging insults why don't you state some facts as to why this great team of yours is elite, because they aren't still haven't beat a team with a winning record, poor pass defense and the run defense has slipped, so please tell me all these positives this team will easily get beat by a team like the Saints.

[40for60]

truth wrote:

Well look it's the kool-ade drinking 40for60 and Archangel instead of slinging insults why don't you state some facts as to why this great team of yours is elite, because they aren't still haven't beat a team with a winning record, poor pass defense and the run defense has slipped, so please tell me all these positives this team will easily get beat by a team like the Saints.

The only fact that counts numbnutz.......7-1
I don't have to defend this team, they are running away with the division after only half a season.
The Vikings can play with anyone, aint's included.
If you want other facts, do your due diligence and look them up yourself, slacker.

[truth]

Well then 40for60 I guess we both agree the Saints are te better team because the only things that matters is 7-1 well the Saints are 8-0 yes you will win that crappy division of yours, but by not playing any real compition throughout the season you will be ready for another letdown and first round playoff ouster. Time to wake up and hop off the fantasy bus.