espn page 2 article....at first i agreed but

[chode_regulator]

the first part i love bc poeple are finally starting to point out that maybe brady isnt all that shit hot and is a product of a system. i mean who couldnt throw to moss and welker. i kinda wish brady coimes back and finds his job gone.

but then this douche starts go on whining about how some teams might make it into the playoffs with an 8-8 or 9-7 record, and that the nfl should change things up. well if thats the case what is the point of having divisions? i know its not the case this year with the afc west, but it could be the case that some divisions are lower wins than others due to them beating up on each other all year. and the afc west as been that way in years past. and is there really taht much difference between 10-6 and 9-7. especially considering what division you play in. i mean i don tthink the cardinals are going to get very far in teh playoffs, but they avhe a better record tahn alot of other teams.

heres a link to the article.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/081125

[johnsmith]

Every division has down times, and even when they do, there is usually at least one respectable team in each division. This years AFC West is a fluke year, someone will emerge next season.

I don't understand why you would want to change something that so obviously works. The NFL dominates all American sports, why change it?

Except maybe the overtime rule.

[chode_regulator]

pretty much waht im thinking

i mean it seems like to me, almost every year there is a weak division

i mean even look at baseball. i bet theres alot of times the sox got held out of the playoffs bc of the yankees and some other divisin leader with less wins.

everyone is so knee jerk reaction these days. makes me wonder where they get these hack columnists from

[monosylab1k]

:lmao Easterbrook is the worst football writer in America.