NFL
PaysenAE• 3 mo agoWe lost to the Rams, who lost to the Panthers, who lost to the Saints, so OBVIOUSLY the Saints are the front runners.
18
15
4Hot Takes
DaxChap• 3 mo ago
Broncos have 0
1
1
jangz• 3 mo ago
Nah
1Other Topics
NFL
rydollaz1• 1 hr ago.@minakimes on Justin Fields to the Chiefs:
"This is a low-risk signing for the Chiefs & an opportunity for him to pursue the Sam Darnold path. The year he spent in San Francisco before getting to the Vikings... that's what Fields can look at this as.
I love it for both sides."
741
NFL
masonh079• 2 hr agoBrock Purdy
Christian McCaffrey
Mike Evans
Ricky Pearsall
Christian Kirk
George Kittle (when he’s back)
not bad
8225
17NFL
masonh079• 2 hr agoYES OR NO - Will AJ Brown play for the Eagles this season?
NoDownload to vote!
YesDownload to vote!
73
3NFL
kimena• 3 hr agoYou know this has always bugged me.
There's been 60 Super Bowls since 1967, and there are 32 teams. So, on average, teams still would have less than two wins (1.875) if wins were uniformly distributed (which we shouldn't expect anyway.) There just simply aren't enough Super Bowls to hold that against most teams.
Like, some of these teams have existed a far shorter time than the Super Bowl itself.
Texans, Browns, Titans, Ravens, Panthers, Jags... all about 30 years or less.
AKA, we should *expect* them to have no Super Bowl wins on average
So, who deserves to be made fun of?
The Arizona Cardinals.
They're the oldest team (1920), had as much opportunity as anyone, even more than most since they were around before any expansions, and STILL, only won a championship back in 1947. Even Detroit has 4 of those.
113
49
41