Best team in the NFL (Alex vs Appy) - Rate.

[Alex]

Starts tomorrow.

We will debate on teams offence, defence and overall game playing.

Appy, will post first with the team he thinks is the best in the NFL at the moment and I will respond and debtate .

[Apadizamek]

Now everyone will say "The patriots are kicking ass" which they are. The patriots are owning, but i'd like to say that you also need to look at the former seasons.

The patriots have always done pretty good in the past 4 years, but the team in my opinion thats doing the best is the Green Bay Packers. They did awful last season, and the season before that. BUT they've come back this year.

With the third best record in the NFL (Might be tied again for second after Dallas lost to the eagles, forgot..) but they're showing real football style out there.

Some say the patriots are the best, but the patriots are always the best. The rockies made it to the world series the Pack will make it to the Superbowl. Better outcome i hope of course.

[Alex]

I honestly agree about the Patriots... They have an outstanding 14-0 record this season, however taking an in depth view reveals much on them... They are an offensive quik strike team, they hit fast and hard with their QB and WR. Their defence has no run stop, its an anti pass defence. That way when they get ahead it takes to long for the oposing team to catch up.

On the other hand I must disagree about the packers. Sure, the packers are a good team, but In games are they always all there?

I've noticed that in different games they pass off the shoulder weight between offence and defence.

In one game they will ride the offence and their defence wont play so hot. In the next game their offence wont play good but their defence will contain.

This brings my to my pick, although probibly disputed by many I believe the Colts to be the overall best team in the NFL.

In every game the Colts utilize BOTH offence and defence. They have a few of those star players but still manage to use everyone succesfully. The Colts are impossible to contain. For example, in the Raiders vs Colts game the Colts won 21 - 14. The Raiders shut down the colts running game holding Addai to 44 yards with 22 carries. However they switched back and used manning to bullet the ball to Wayne, clark and gonzolez.

See, the colts have the run game and the pass game. Not only that they have the number 1 pass defence in the leuage. Sure, their run stop wasnt that great on sunday but as you saw in the ravens game they brough Sanders down into the box and used him to stop Maghee. Now, you need to let Sanders drop back to cover pass zones... But when you bring Dwight Freeny back in he alone discourages the run...


(Gah I might have gone over 500 wods >.>)

[Apadizamek]

in the game of football there are usually teams around with amazing defenses. and some with amazing offenses.

When playing said teams your offense of defense respectively will be worked harder and look worse in comparison to the other in these games. For example if the packers were to play the Bears there defense would shine against the bears decent offense, but their offense would probably not shine due to the bears amazing defense.

The Colts have always been a good team, they won the super bowl and Peyton Manning is a great quarter back, but he's no Brett Farve, Farve is having one of his best if his best seasons in his career. He's supported by great offense and without a doubt either the Colts will not be going to the superbowl. They'll be crushed by the pat's, but the packers have a real chance.

[Alex]

True, teams play differently against different teams. However you say manning is no farve, I disagree and infact think that Manning is even beter. When you look at game stats Manning does just as well as farve. The main difference that I see is that the Colts and the Packers have a pretty even offence, however the Colts defence shines over that of the Packers. The packers have a good DE and 2 ok CB's, The Colts 2 main defensive players are Freeny and sanders, but the rest of the colts defence plays as a team, and is very organized. The packers have a few star players that make big plays... The colts have those star players but also wrk together as a team.

For example, the packers team hasn't changed really since last year, however they are winning alot more. They are simply playing beter. They are still the same team though.

The colts have been good in recent years and continue to be good, even with a new RB and a new FS and a few other changes. The Colts have been a good team in recent years however are still a good team this year. The packers have always had the potention aparently however never used it untill now. Thats why the colts are beter, they are more consistant.

[Apadizamek]

Peyton Manning is far younger then Favre. He is thirty eight years old and is one of the oldest quarterbacks still playing today. He's started more games then anyone in history. Such a man cannot be expected to play as well as Manning but yet he has, this helps show how much better the packers are doing then the colts.

He's been able to pass better to more able receivers and he's been protected from sacks better. The defense is far improved as well, stopping running and passing much better then they have in earlier years, while the colts have remained the same.

The colts record is also not as impressive as the Packers which says quite a lot.

[Alex]

I disagree that farve is beter then manning, I recognize that some players have years when they shine and they don't in others. However Manning has thrown 28 TD's while Farve has thrown only 26. Colts 2nd WR Reggie Wayne has gone for 1300 recieving yards while the Packers #1 reciever has gone for just over 1000.

I think its very unfair to say that the packers are doing beter then the colts when you say that the packers ahve improved and the colts have remained the same, this implies that the colts aren't any good.

When saying the colts have stayed the same then you are saying they are still the same team that won the superbowl last year. Infact I must agree, the colts players have changed but their statistics and game play stratagys have remained the same... Thats a good thing, the packers have improved on a quiet frankly crummy team. While the Colts have reamined the same, the same being the super bowl champs that defeated the Pats last year in the division confrance.

[Apadizamek]

Again Manning is barely ahead of a man who's far older and is at the end of his career.

Your also forgetting that the packers are the most inexperienced and youngest team in the NFL at this time, the colts have more or less been together since their last superbowl this is the new packers first year together, that should say something.

The Packers have shown constantly that they are a one of the best teams in the league so far, even though as i said there the youngest and least experienced. With there record that trumps the colts and the patriots, who have been good teams and have kept their team more or less the same throughout their winning streaks.

[Alex]

First off, the colts last superbowl was last year... Secondly its not a matter of the age of the team, but the best team in the NFL, there is no doubt that the Packers are one of the beter teams in the NFL but they are not the best.

You are saying that the Colts have had the same team year after year just because Manning has stayed as QB?

The Colts have had lots of changes in positions. Most of the Colts offensive line has been out this season from injuries, Bob sanders has been out most of last season with injuries and is just now starting for the Colts. They also have the new WR Gonzalez to replace injuried Harrison. Not only that but the colts RB J. Addai isnt new to the team but is new to the starting position. Last year Rhodes was starting. I think that this shows that for every change the Packers have made the Colts have done the same ammount.

I don't understand why the packers are being called a young NFL team. Sure, your packers have some young RB's and WR's. However most of the offensive line is in their late 20's or early 30's. Not only that but the Packers 2 premire CB's; Woodson and Harris are both in their 30's. I'll also point out that the D. Line of the packers isn't really that young overall. You also have one of the oldest QB's in the NFL.

Sure there may be some young players on the packers but there are just as many on the Colts.

[Myseri]

I purpose a question. You two seem to keep arguing about who is the best quarterback based on the team. While they may be good, the quarterback does make the team. So who else does well one the team for them to benefit?

Also, you have spoken almost completely about offense. What about defense? Packers have allowed more sacks than Indianapolis and Favre has suffered more injuries.

[Alex]

The main difference that I see is that the Colts and the Packers have a pretty even offence, however the Colts defence shines over that of the Packers. The packers have a good DE and 2 ok CB's, The Colts 2 main defensive players are Freeny and sanders, but the rest of the colts defence plays as a team, and is very organized. The packers have a few star players that make big plays... The colts have those star players but also wrk together as a team.

Im pretty sure thats talking about defence?

There have also been a few other times when I have mentioned the Colts and Packers defence.

We arn't saying the QB makes the team but there was a small side debat on who was beter Manning or Farve. However that isnt really off topic as the QB has alot to do with the team.

[Osi]

Both sides used words such as good and great which are not debatable terms. Manning is good because yadda yadda would have been better maybe some statistics or examples? Saying someone is better and not continueing makes you seem like a nimrod. Idk. I'm rating Alex only as I would prefer to rate Appy in the nuke thread once it is completed.

Alex 65/100 and im being generous. You argued well but failed to use terms that an outside player could understand. I'm not a big fan of football and Semper is not American so many terms could easily be lost on the both of us. You debate for your audience not yourself. Your statistics are poor and you don't source your information. You countering ability is also poor.

[Alex]

I disagree that farve is beter then manning, I recognize that some players have years when they shine and they don't in others. However Manning has thrown 28 TD's while Farve has thrown only 26. Colts 2nd WR Reggie Wayne has gone for 1300 recieving yards while the Packers #1 reciever has gone for just over 1000.

I do believe those are statistics...
those are but there is a severe lack...
As for the rating, it was a debate on football. If someone doesn't know about football then they probibly have no reason to read this thread.
You set your debate for the people you are judged by not your personal fancy.
You say that we shouldn't use football words like fumble, interception, reception, sack, YAC. However if we didn't use those words and sat there and explained it to those like you that don't know about football you would remove rating points and say that we got off topic trying to explain every little detail rather then acctually debating.
Hardly your getting defensive about my position. Had you explained or refrenced links to explain the words I would have added points
The way you are puting it is a lose lose situation. I also feel that your rating is unbaised and based souly on this thread and debate based on things in the past, manly AE.
And on a final note, call me biased at your own peril.

[Osi]

I feel that you shouldn't question my better judgement and accept my rating.

you had an extreme lack of statistics and your debate was more of an arguement then a presentation of facts.

[Alex]

So your changing it now? First you say that I show no statistics then when I quote myself saying them you say its not enough.

Secondly your saying I have to provide links to the words that you wouldn't understand because you don't watch football. However looking back at some of your debate threads with my limited knowledge of Halo I don't see you posting links or explaining words that only a Halo finatic would know...

Thirdly you are saying I shouldn't debate on my own personal fancy and do it for those that judge this thread. However if someone doesn't know anything about football they shouldn't judge the thread.

The Covenant spans most of the Orion arm. It is a combined force of eight alien races from multiple planets with populations numbering in the billions. They are capable of almost instant faster than light travel and a single ship can liquefy the surface of a planet. The shields on Covenant orbitals can repel an impact with a moon, and an attack fleet is made of anywhere from 30 to 500 ships. Covenant weaponry is also extremely versatile and much more expansive then that of the Goa’uld Empire.

The Pillar of Autumn was commanded by an AI with reactions time far greater than humanly possible. The Pillar is also a Haylcon class cruiser and was picked for that mission for a single reason.

In the sky they can counter the death gliders with the ighly manuverable Banshee and Phantoms

A pair of Covenant Hunters would easily crush a Kull warrior

I've underlined the words that YOU have said that have no links, no explainations and that a non halo player would not know.