What are the chances of 3 NFC West teams making the playoffs

[Scottemojo]

I think the Rams have an outside chance of making this happen.

All three NFC West teams have, at least on paper, difficult schedules as far as opponents win % goes. The Niners have a favorable home/away schedule, so there is that. If we were playing the AFC west/NFC East this year, I would give three teams from the division a good chance, but we are not. So I have to say it is a slim chance.

 

[RolandDeschain]

It'll happen if AvengerRam is right about Bradford.

...So, no, it's not going to happen.

 

[rdskns4eva]

I know this will tick off a few of the 49ers fans that come on here, but I could see the team regressing to out of the playoffs this year possibly as it depends how the WRs play and how the D-Line holds up. However even as a Rams fan, I don't think the Rams make the playoffs this year - we will be 8-8 or 9-7, so close but not in the playoff picture.

Here are my power rankings in the conference right now:
1. Seattle
2. Atlanta
3. NY Giants
4. Green Bay
5. San Francisco
6. New Orleans
7. St Louis
8. Washington
9. Dallas
10. Chicago
11. Minnesota
12. Detroit
13. Tampa
14. Arizona
15. Carolina
16. Philadelphia

NFC is much tougher than the AFC

Wow, so you have the Rams better than Wash, Dallas and Minnesota? Didnt the Vikings AND Detroit beat the Rams last year? Yea, they did. The Rams lost to all 4 teams in the NFC North, yet you have the Rams better than 3/4ths of that division? That doesnt make much sense. But, to each his own.

NY isnt the 3rd best team in the NFC, especially with question marks at RB and WR (injuries).

The Panthers are better than the Cardinals. The Cards might be the worst team in the conf and Carson Palmer hasnt done much in like 6 years. He had a decent last season in Oakland and he's a much better option than what they had last year but he's nowhere near what he was early in his Cinci career. Also, the Cards still have Oline issues and no real answer at RB.

My Power Rankings would be:

1. SF
2. Atlanta
3. Seattle
4. Greenbay
5. Wash
6. NO
7. NY
8. Minn
9. Dal
10. Chi
11. Rams
12. Det
13. TB
14. Car
15. Phi
16. Cards

 

[RolandDeschain]

The Cards might be the worst team in the conf

This is ridiculous. Their defense alone makes them ineligible for "worst in conference" discussion. They had the 6th-ranked defense in the NFL last year per Football Outsiders. When you consider how often their offense went 3-and-out and stuck a tired defense right back out on the field, that is VERY impressive.

 

[chris98251]

The one thing that makes the Cards dangerous is the nothing to lose mentality they will bring on offense this year, they will sling the ball around and run gadget plays that can tilt the balance of a game, they may lose statistic wise but win on points. The big concern as a Cards fan I would have is can they keep Palmer healthy.

 

[rdskns4eva]

The Cards might be the worst team in the conf

This is ridiculous. Their defense alone makes them ineligible for "worst in conference" discussion. They had the 6th-ranked defense in the NFL last year per Football Outsiders. When you consider how often their offense went 3-and-out and stuck a tired defense right back out on the field, that is VERY impressive.

That great defense got them 5 wins last year. I know people on this board LOVE FO (and I like them to since they said the 1991 Redskins were the greatest team of all time), at the end of the day, the only thing that matters are records.

As Parcels said, you are what your record says you are. Ok, ok, a case can be made for the Eagles or the Lions...but they are in the conversation for sure.

 

[candyman4881]

Wow, so you have the Rams better than Wash, Dallas and Minnesota? Didnt the Vikings AND Detroit beat the Rams last year? Yea, they did. The Rams lost to all 4 teams in the NFC North, yet you have the Rams better than 3/4ths of that division? That doesnt make much sense. But, to each his own.

NY isnt the 3rd best team in the NFC, especially with question marks at RB and WR (injuries).

The Panthers are better than the Cardinals. The Cards might be the worst team in the conf and Carson Palmer hasnt done much in like 6 years. He had a decent last season in Oakland and he's a much better option than what they had last year but he's nowhere near what he was early in his Cinci career. Also, the Cards still have Oline issues and no real answer at RB.

My Power Rankings would be:

1. SF
2. Atlanta
3. Seattle
4. Greenbay
5. Wash
6. NO
7. NY
8. Minn
9. Dal
10. Chi
11. Rams
12. Det
13. TB
14. Car
15. Phi
16. Cards

I will agree to disagree with you - using your logic however, the Rams should be better than the Redskins because the Rams beat them correct?

I do think the Rams are better than the Cowboys, Bears, and Vikings. That may be the homer in me talking, but the Cowboys are inconsistent, especially away from home, the Bears are going through a transitional year where I think the offense will go through growing pains of a new system and the defense will take a step back, and the Vikings will still be a playoff contender, but ultimately will fail due to their QB.

 

[RolandDeschain]

As Parcels said, you are what your record says you are.

Give me a break. So, the 11-5 Colts were as good as the 11-5 Seahawks and 11-5 Packers, last year? The Seahawks scored 167 more points than they allowed last year. The Packers, 97. The Colts? -30. That's right, they gave UP more points than they scored on the year, despite having the easiest schedule in the league.

Come on. In the game of football, where you only have 16 games, and all the rule changes over the past couple decades that have evened out the game more, that statement's simply less true in the NFL than in any other major sport.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

It'll happen if AvengerRam is right about Bradford.

...So, no, it's not going to happen.

I would agree given he is working with rookie WR's and that is a recipe for not a lot of scoring. Sam looks about like Cam no real improvement to speak of.

 

[rdskns4eva]

Wow, so you have the Rams better than Wash, Dallas and Minnesota? Didnt the Vikings AND Detroit beat the Rams last year? Yea, they did. The Rams lost to all 4 teams in the NFC North, yet you have the Rams better than 3/4ths of that division? That doesnt make much sense. But, to each his own.

NY isnt the 3rd best team in the NFC, especially with question marks at RB and WR (injuries).

The Panthers are better than the Cardinals. The Cards might be the worst team in the conf and Carson Palmer hasnt done much in like 6 years. He had a decent last season in Oakland and he's a much better option than what they had last year but he's nowhere near what he was early in his Cinci career. Also, the Cards still have Oline issues and no real answer at RB.

My Power Rankings would be:

1. SF
2. Atlanta
3. Seattle
4. Greenbay
5. Wash
6. NO
7. NY
8. Minn
9. Dal
10. Chi
11. Rams
12. Det
13. TB
14. Car
15. Phi
16. Cards

I will agree to disagree with you - using your logic however, the Rams should be better than the Redskins because the Rams beat them correct?

I do think the Rams are better than the Cowboys, Bears, and Vikings. That may be the homer in me talking, but the Cowboys are inconsistent, especially away from home, the Bears are going through a transitional year where I think the offense will go through growing pains of a new system and the defense will take a step back, and the Vikings will still be a playoff contender, but ultimately will fail due to their QB.

The logic I'm using is just because team A beats team B does not mean they are a better team than team b, but when team A beats team B AND they have a better record than team B AND they make the play offs, AND team B did not make the playoffs, then Team A is better than Team B.

A good example is the 1990's Cowboys. The 1990's Cowboys lost to the Redskins all the time. No one is saying that the 1990's Redskins were better than the Cowboys (not counting the 91 Redskins.). Thats the logic I'm using.

The Rams havent sniffed the playoffs since 2004. Since that time, the Vikings have made the playoffs 3 times, and the Cowboys have made the playoffs 3 times. You can make an argument that the Rams MIGHT be better than the Lions but the Rams still are not a good team and certainly no where near a potential playoff team in the NFC right now. Things can change once the season starts and games matter, so we'll see.

 

[chris98251]

Yeah I saw the Ratmans quote today.

“We have a team that you’re going to be proud of,” Shanahan said. “They have set the expectations: anything short of a Super Bowl is a failure.”

This should get interesting around December.

 

[rdskns4eva]

As Parcels said, you are what your record says you are.

Give me a break. So, the 11-5 Colts were as good as the 11-5 Seahawks and 11-5 Packers, last year? The Seahawks scored 167 more points than they allowed last year. The Packers, 97. The Colts? -30. That's right, they gave UP more points than they scored on the year, despite having the easiest schedule in the league.

Come on. In the game of football, where you only have 16 games, and all the rule changes over the past couple decades that have evened out the game more, that statement's simply less true in the NFL than in any other major sport.

I'm not saying that the Colts were as good than those teams, but they were 11-5 and thats all that matters. Joe Gibbs used to say all the time "First you win, THEN you get good". It doesnt matter how you win, just win and thats what the Colts did last year, as ugly as they made it look when they did it.

The Giants scored 85 more points than they allowed and missed the playoffs. You dont think they trade that for -30 and 11-5 and a playoff spot? I would, in a heart beat.

DVOA, point differential, Turnover ratio...all those are nice. Wins and losses are what matter in the end. And for the record, I do think the colts are flukes, but they were in the playoffs and a bunch of other teams that people said were better missed the playoffs.

 

[kearly]

New Orleans? They had the worst defense in the history of the league last year. Even with a slight improvement, teams are going to score a lot of points on that team. I think the Saints finish within one game of 8-8 at best.

I'm not sure what to make of the Saints myself. But you would probably agree that Sean Payton is one of the very best coaches in the league? Teams that lose elite coaches tend to tumble. If his coaching is worth a couple wins, the 2012 Saints might be a playoff team. The Saint's offense doesn't look like it's slowing down yet, and that defense can only go up. Defense tends to vary season to season much more than offense, btw. I think at the very least, the Saints are very likely to finish closer to the playoffs than the Rams will.

 

[RamzFanz]

0% chance, Rams suck, and the Cardinals suck worse.

Anyone who thinks the Rams suck isn't paying attention.

They are fielding the defense that created the biggest yard losses for opposing teams and most sacks in the NFL. Well, no, that's not true, they are fielding a BETTER D than last season.

They are also fielding a new O full of explosive talent and a much improved O line.

If you thought NFCW teams had a hard time with the Rams last season, you haven't seen anything yet. A Sweep of the NFCW isn't reaching at all.

The only real question is if the Rams can score 7 more points per game. If they do that, and it is looking very likely they can, they will go to the postseason.

 

[RamzFanz]

The Rams havent sniffed the playoffs since 2004. Since that time, the Vikings have made the playoffs 3 times, and the Cowboys have made the playoffs 3 times. You can make an argument that the Rams MIGHT be better than the Lions but the Rams still are not a good team and certainly no where near a potential playoff team in the NFC right now. Things can change once the season starts and games matter, so we'll see.

That's all nonsense. You can't look backwards at the Rams' O and use that to justify your ranking of the Rams.

They have a TOP D that is even more improved this season. With the most total yard losses, most sacks, and the highest scoring defensive player in the NFL last season, the Rams D is the real deal. If the GB game is any sign of what Wilson does under pressure, you're in for a shock.

The O has added explosiveness, speed, great hands, and protection for Bradford. Will it gel into an O that lives up to their new exceptional talent? We'll see. Maybe, maybe not but YOU and I don't know and any rating other than great potential but unknown is dishonest or ignorant.

 

[JSeahawks]

No chance.

 

[rdskns4eva]

The Rams havent sniffed the playoffs since 2004. Since that time, the Vikings have made the playoffs 3 times, and the Cowboys have made the playoffs 3 times. You can make an argument that the Rams MIGHT be better than the Lions but the Rams still are not a good team and certainly no where near a potential playoff team in the NFC right now. Things can change once the season starts and games matter, so we'll see.

That's all nonsense. You can't look backwards at the Rams' O and use that to justify your ranking of the Rams.

They have a TOP D that is even more improved this season. With the most total yard losses, most sacks, and the highest scoring defensive player in the NFL last season, the Rams D is the real deal. If the GB game is any sign of what Wilson does under pressure, you're in for a shock.

The O has added explosiveness, speed, great hands, and protection for Bradford. Will it gel into an O that lives up to their new exceptional talent? We'll see. Maybe, maybe not but YOU and I don't know and any rating other than great potential but unknown is dishonest or ignorant.

lol The Rams D is most certainly not the real deal.

They gave up 24 or more points 7 times last year.

Of the 9 teams they held under 24 points, 5 were divisional foes. The other 4 were non playoff teams, not including the Cardinals. They gave up 36 at home to a team without a legitimate qb (Minn) and gave up 30 and 45 AT HOME to Green Bay and NE in back to back weeks. Real deal defenses do not do that. I know it's Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady but still, you gotta stop somebody on defense if you are the real deal.

 

[chris98251]

 

[pmedic920]

3 NFCW teams in playoffs? Nope. But I still think something freaky will happen and Rams finish ahead of 9ers. Not because the Rams are better than SanFran but because the the 9ers will have some unforeseen problems.

 

[RamzFanz]

The Rams havent sniffed the playoffs since 2004. Since that time, the Vikings have made the playoffs 3 times, and the Cowboys have made the playoffs 3 times. You can make an argument that the Rams MIGHT be better than the Lions but the Rams still are not a good team and certainly no where near a potential playoff team in the NFC right now. Things can change once the season starts and games matter, so we'll see.

That's all nonsense. You can't look backwards at the Rams' O and use that to justify your ranking of the Rams.

They have a TOP D that is even more improved this season. With the most total yard losses, most sacks, and the highest scoring defensive player in the NFL last season, the Rams D is the real deal. If the GB game is any sign of what Wilson does under pressure, you're in for a shock.

The O has added explosiveness, speed, great hands, and protection for Bradford. Will it gel into an O that lives up to their new exceptional talent? We'll see. Maybe, maybe not but YOU and I don't know and any rating other than great potential but unknown is dishonest or ignorant.

lol The Rams D is most certainly not the real deal.

They gave up 24 or more points 7 times last year.

Of the 9 teams they held under 24 points, 5 were divisional foes. The other 4 were non playoff teams, not including the Cardinals. They gave up 36 at home to a team without a legitimate qb (Minn) and gave up 30 and 45 AT HOME to Green Bay and NE in back to back weeks. Real deal defenses do not do that. I know it's Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady but still, you gotta stop somebody on defense if you are the real deal.

...and yet the Seahawks could only score 33 points on them over 2 games. Just ONE more point than the Rams scored against the Hawks. I guess the Hawks O must not be the real deal.

Did you see the Rams highlights last night? Yeah, that's the real deal. Wait until Fisher actually lets them play.