The AFC East - historically a weak division?

[TD Ryan2 316]

I've seen a lot of chatter around here lately about the AFC East and how it's been a weak division.

So, I did a little research on the division. I went back to 2001 and took a look at the wins/standings/playoffs to get an idea of just how bad (or good?) the AFC East has been.

 

It appears that the AFC East is pretty average - occasionally a weak division, occasionally a strong division, but not really noteworthy either way.

 

Here is the breakdown:

 

 

2001 – AFC East is a Strong Division

NE 11-5

MIA 11-5

NYJ 11-5

Notes: Only division with 3 10+ win teams.

NE, MIA, NYJ all playoff teams – NE wins SB

 

2002 – AFC East is a Mediocre to Weak Division

NYJ / MIA / NE all 9 wins

BUF 8 wins

Notes: NYJ make playoffs and win Wildcard game.

There is no dominant and no terrible team in the division this year.

 

2003 – AFC East is a Mediocre Division

NE 14-2

MIA 10-6

NYJ / BUF both 6 – 10

Notes: No division had more than (2) 10 win teams.

Every division besides AFC East had a team with fewer than 6 wins – AFC West had two 4 wins, NFC East a 5 & 4 win.

NE wins SB

 

2004 – AFC East is a Strong Division

NE 14-2

NYJ 10-6

BUF 9-7

MIA 4-12

Notes: NE and NYJ make playoffs – NYJ win wildcard, NE wins SB.

All 3 NFC divisions have 3 teams with 8 or fewer wins (a total of 12 NFC teams with fewer than 8 wins)

NE wins SB

 

2005 – AFC is a Weak Division

NE, 10-6 – is the only 10 win team in the Division.

MIA (9w), BUF (5w), NYJ (4w)

Notes: AFC East is not worst division. AFC South with TEN (4-12) and HOU (2-14).

NFC North and West each have a 5w and 4w team.

 

2006 – AFC East is a Strong Division

NE 12-4

NYJ 10-6

BUF 7-9

MIA 6-10

Notes: NE and NYJ make playoffs.

NE loses AFC Championship to IND.

Notes: Lots of parity this year, entire NFC has only 3 teams with 10+ wins.

SD wins 14 but has the lowly 2 win Raiders in the division and loses to NE in playoffs.

 

2007 – AFC East is a Weak Division

NE goes 16 – 0

MIA only wins 1 game

Notes: AFC east is the worst division in NFL, but NE steamrolls the entire league and loses in SB.

 

2008 – AFC East is a Mediocre Division

MIA 11-5

NE 11-5

NJY 9-7

BUF 7-9

Notes: NE misses playoffs as an 11 win team. MIA loses in Wildcard to BAL.

The AFC West has no 10 win team and KC at 2w

The NFC West has no 10 win team and STL at 2w

The NFC North has one 10 win team (MIN, 10w) but also has the winless DET (0 wins)

 

2009 – AFC East is a Strong Division

NE 10-6

NYJ 9-7

MIA 7-9

BUF 6-10

Notes: NE and NYJ make playoffs. NYJ lose in AFC Championship.

No AFC division had 2 teams with 10+ wins.

NFC records start to improve but each NFC division still has a doormat (WAS & DAL both 4w, DET 2w, TB 3w, STL 1w)

 

2010 – AFC East is a Mediocre to Strong Division

NE 14-2

NYJ 11-5

MIA 7-9

BUF 4-12

Notes: NE and NYJ make playoffs. NYJ lose in AFC Championship.

NFC West has no team with more than 7w.

Bottom two teams in AFC North, AFC South, NFC East, NFC North all have 6 or fewer wins in.

 

2011 – AFC East is a Mediocre Division

NE 13-3

NYJ 8-8

MIA 6-9

BUF 6-9

Notes: NE loses in SB.

DEN wins AFC West at 8-8.

NYG win NFC East at 9-7 – go on to win SB.

Every division besides AFC East and AFC West had at least 1 team with 5 or fewer wins. The AFC South had 2 teams with JAX 5w and IND 2w.

 

2012 – AFC East is a Weak Division

NE 12-4

MIA 7-9

NYJ 6-10

BUF 6-10

Notes: NE loses in AFC Championship.

AFC East, NFC West, and AFC West each have 3 teams with 7 or fewer wins.

 

2013 - ADDED

NE 12-4

NYJ 8-8

MIA 8-8

MIA 6-10

Notes: AFC East had three teams finish at .500 or better, one of four divisions that did that. They were one of two divisions where the worst team won at least 6 games.

NE played DEN in AFC Championship

 

The Patriots have won 78% of their division games over the last ten years and 75% of their non division games.

 

From 2002-2012, AFC East teams had 237 wins against teams outside their division, which ties them for the most among all divisions.

 

The AFC East is the only division in football where every team has won at least 6 games the last three years.

 

The Jets played in two of the last four AFC Championship games.

[parrot 789]

If you repeat a lie often enough...

[MDC 7,882]

I'd be interested to see how AFC East teams other than the Pats did outside the division?

 

I think the perception that the division is bad is mostly because no team other than the Pats has had a credible starting QB in forever.

 

Pennington is probably the only other QB in the East who's been decent for more than a season in the past 10 years. And as we know he wasn't even as good as McNair.

[RoadLizard 73]

I highly question calling a division tough when the bottom 3 teams are 9-7, 7-9, and 6-10. Thats not strong, its Cream Puff. Im not saying that the Pats have only won because of a crappy division but it certainly helps the cause. The Jets had a few decent runs around 2009-2011 but are basically DOA now. The Bills have been rebuilding since...oh..... around 1995. The Phins have been lousy since.... oh.... Marino left.

 

It is what it is. The AFC East hasnt been a juggernaut division since like a long freakin time.

[TD Ryan2 316]

The AFC East hasnt been a juggernaut division since like a long freakin time.

agreed.

my contention is that the AFC East has been pretty mediocre... with some peaks and valleys, but pretty much mediocre/average/unremarkable. since 2001.

 

What divisions do you consider "juggernaut" since 2001?

[Sho Nuff 720]

Yes...the AFC East outside of the Pats blows.

The Jets had a small run there...but thats it.

The Bills and Dolphins suck ass and have for a while now.

[TD Ryan2 316]

I'd be interested to see how AFC East teams other than the Pats did outside the division?

 

I think the perception that the division is bad is mostly because no team other than the Pats has had a credible starting QB in forever.

 

good question on the outside division records... I don't know but I too am curious.

 

And you're right about the QBs - it's a significant part of what's shapes the perception.

[edjr 6,898]

Yes...the AFC East outside of the Pats blows.

The Jets had a small run there...but thats it.

The Bills and Dolphins suck ass and have for a while now.

 

Does it have even a little to do with how good the patriots have been?

 

Chicken or the egg?

[parrot 789]

Yes...the AFC East outside of the Pats blows.

The Jets had a small run there...but thats it.

The Bills and Dolphins suck ass and have for a while now.

 

The Dolphins and Jets were 8-8 this year. The winner of your division was 8-7-1.

[parrot 789]

I highly question calling a division tough when the bottom 3 teams are 9-7, 7-9, and 6-10. Thats not strong, its Cream Puff.

 

'Tough' may be a stetch, but no moreso than 'Cream Puff'. In only one other division that year did every team win at least 6 games. Two different divisions had at least two teams that won fewer than 6 games. The bottom three AFC team won 22 games. The league average was 20 games.

[Sho Nuff 720]

 

Does it have even a little to do with how good the patriots have been?

 

Chicken or the egg?

 

Or have the Pats really been that good...or lucky to play 6 games against weaker competition?

[Sho Nuff 720]

 

The Dolphins and Jets were 8-8 this year. The winner of your division was 8-7-1.

 

Sure...I guess if you want to talk about it being about one year and not historically.

Also if you want to compare a team going 8-7-1 without its probably 3 most important players...sure.

BTW...the NFC North was weak this year.

2 teams lost their starting QBs and struggled mightily...the Lions, well, they were the Lions. And the Vikings suck again with no QB.

[TD Ryan2 316]

 

Sure...I guess if you want to talk about it being about one year and not historically.

Also if you want to compare a team going 8-7-1 without its probably 3 most important players...sure.

BTW...the NFC North was weak this year.

2 teams lost their starting QBs and struggled mightily...the Lions, well, they were the Lions. And the Vikings suck again with no QB.

Sho - no stories, not "bad lucks" etc - we can't start talking about injuries and what-ifs when evaluating this.

I truly want to understand if the AFC East is really that weak?

 

I gave you the historical data to make the case that the AFC Ease has been about average - occasionally weak, occasionally strong.

 

I'll ask again. What division has been consistently tougher or "Strong" over that time period since 2001?

[TD Ryan2 316]

 

Or have the Pats really been that good...or lucky to play 6 games against weaker competition?

Parrot gave us NE's winning percentage outside the division:

 

The Patriots have won 78% of their division games over the last ten years and 75% of their non division games.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,543]

we know as of right now the 2 best divisions in football are AFC and NFC West

[FeelingMN 273]

I don't know why the Patriots can't be a great team while also playing in a weak division.

 

The AFCEast has produced one team with a winning record each of the past three seasons....the Patriots. How is that a tough division? And don't tell me it's because New England is so great. SF and SEA have been very good the past couple years....Arizona was very good this year. You can have multiple good teams in the same division....well, unless you're the AFCEast.

 

But don't get me wrong....I totally respect the Patriots as an organization. What they've done in this era of football is amazing. Belichick is a genius. Getting the right players to fit your system and compete at a very high level, year in year out is a true sign of greatness. They are the gold standard of the league.

 

But their division just isn't that good. MIA and BUF have combined to make the playoffs just twice since 2001. Yikes. But who cares. Historians don't focus too much on division titles. They do focus on what happens in January and February....two months when the Pats have shined. That's all that really matters.

[parrot 789]

The AFCEast has produced one team with a winning record each of the past three seasons....the Patriots. How is that a tough division?

 

Again, they're also the only division where every team has won at least 6 games over the last three years. Point being that while maybe they haven't been particularly good, they haven't been pushovers either.

[IGotWorms 4,063]

Jets went to AFC Championship a couple times. Dolphins were almost perennially predicted to overcome the Pats and take the division (I think they were even a sexy Superbowl pick a couple of years).

 

AFC East was the third best division this year in terms of it's overall record versus teams played outside the division.

 

I'm really not seeing that it is a "weak" division. Is it as strong as, say, the NFC West is today? Hell no. But a few years ago it was MUCH stronger than that very same division.

 

Point is, over the course of the Patriots' dominance the AFC East probably hasn't been appreciably worse than any other division.

[FeelingMN 273]

Again, they're also the only division where every team has won at least 6 games over the last three years. Point being that while maybe they haven't been particularly good, they haven't been pushovers either.

 

Ok....so the AFCEast hasn't been a particularly good division. Not a weak division....just not particularly good. I guess there's a difference.

[IGotWorms 4,063]

Ok....so the AFCEast hasn't been a particularly good division. Not a weak division....just not particularly good. I guess there's a difference.

It's hard for other teams to rise to the top when you have a perennial winner atop the division.

 

Imagine the NFC East if the Cowboys won four more games every single year. How would the Giants or Eagles possibly contend with that? How could the Redskins even fathom ever being relevant?

[MDC 7,882]

It's hard for other teams to rise to the top when you have a perennial winner atop the division.

 

Imagine the NFC East if the Cowboys won four more games every single year. How would the Giants or Eagles possibly contend with that? How could the Redskins even fathom ever being relevant?

A big part of the Eagles success from 2000-2005 was the fact that they were the only team with a franchise QB. Sure if you have a suffocating D and everything breaks right you can go 10-6 but that's not sustainable with bad QB play.

 

The Pats have been a good team over a 10-year period no doubt but their record is probably inflated by the fact that Ryan Fitzpatrick and Chad Henne are pretty typical of the signal callers they've been facing in divisional games. It's no coincidence that the Jets are the only team to threaten them over that time frame - Pennington and Sanchez are the only other QBs in the East to have a few decent seasons.

[RoadLizard 73]

agreed.

my contention is that the AFC East has been pretty mediocre... with some peaks and valleys, but pretty much mediocre/average/unremarkable. since 2001.

 

What divisions do you consider "juggernaut" since 2001?

Ya know - NONE! Parity and free agency have ruined it. Remember when the NFC East used to be *that* division? Then, once you stopped listening to the hype you realized it was NOT so tough? It seems that divisions go in cycles just like most teams do.

 

Again - The Pats have been head and shoulders above their divisional counterparts for a while. Thats a props to THEM for keeping together for so long. You can only bow to it. But its also fair to say that over the years they may have had more trouble with consistent trouble from another team. Like Pitt and Balt, Dallas & the Giants, etc, etc. Imagine if the 1990's Bills teams were battling it out with NE all these years! That'd be worth paying to watch.....

 

No question NE has outclassed much of the AFC for many years. I can say that.

[FeelingMN 273]

It's hard for other teams to rise to the top when you have a perennial winner atop the division.

Imagine the NFC East if the Cowboys won four more games every single year. How would the Giants or Eagles possibly contend with that? How could the Redskins even fathom ever being relevant?

San Francisco and Seattle have had really good years the past couple seasons. Arizona had a good season in 2013 too. The AFCWest sent three teams to the playoffs this year.

 

So this notion that a really good team at the top of the division somehow suppresses the rest of the teams is flawed. Every division has had multiple winning teams/playoff teams at least once the past three years.....except the AFCEast.

 

And maybe the AFCEast didn't field any doormats during that time.....but they didn't churn out winners either....except for New England.

[IGotWorms 4,063]

San Francisco and Seattle have had really good years the past couple seasons. Arizona had a good season in 2013 too. The AFCWest sent three teams to the playoffs this year.

 

So this notion that a really good team at the top of the division somehow suppresses the rest of the teams is flawed. Every division has had multiple winning teams/playoff teams at least once the past three years.....except the AFCEast.

 

And maybe the AFCEast didn't field any doormats during that time.....but they didn't churn out winners either....except for New England.

Are you seriously using the NFC West as your reference point? Sure it's a great division now but they sent a seven-win division "winner" to the playoffs just a few short years ago.

[parrot 789]

Ok....so the AFCEast hasn't been a particularly good division. Not a weak division....just not particularly good. I guess there's a difference.

 

Of course there is. You have weak divisions, 1 or 2 a year; good divisions, 1 or 2 a year; and then the 4 - 6 divisions falling somewhere in the middle. To hear people tell it, the AFC East is one of those weak divisions year in and year out, and that's just not the case, and they rarely have the 2 - 3 win pushover teams. They are generally a middlin' division.

[MDC 7,882]

Pats fans should probably be more concerned with the fact the NE hasn't won *** a Super Bowl since Spygate broke.

[edjr 6,898]

Pats fans should probably be more concerned with the fact the NE hasn't won a Super Bowl since Tom met Gazelle

 

We are.

[parrot 789]

Pats fans should probably be more concerned with the fact the NE hasn't won *** a Super Bowl since Spygate broke.

 

Neither have 27 other NFL teams. SuperBowls are hard to win. You would think Eagles fans would understand this just about as well as anyone.

[FeelingMN 273]

Are you seriously using the NFC West as your reference point? Sure it's a great division now but they sent a seven-win division "winner" to the playoffs just a few short years ago.

 

Why is it a great division now? Because most of the teams had a winning record? Because it has two of the elite teams in the league? And that contrasts with a division a few years ago where nobody in that division had a winning record. And it was a weak division then, right?

 

So a division where 100% of the teams don't have a winning record is weak, but a division where 75% of the teams don't have a winning record.....for three straight years isn't?

 

If you wanna define the strength of a division based on the number of winning teams it produces, then you have to admit the AFCEast is weak because it has been the only division in football the past three years where 3/4 of all the teams haven't had a winning season.

 

 

 

Of course there is. You have weak divisions, 1 or 2 a year; good divisions, 1 or 2 a year; and then the 4 - 6 divisions falling somewhere in the middle. To hear people tell it, the AFC East is one of those weak divisions year in and year out, and that's just not the case, and they rarely have the 2 - 3 win pushover teams. They are generally a middlin' division.

 

Most divisions have two teams with winning records.....I'd say they are middlin'. Some divisions have 3 winning teams....those are great divisions. The AFCEast is the only division where most of the teams don't have a winning record....for three straight years. Weak.

[IGotWorms 4,063]

 

 

Why is it a great division now? Because most of the teams had a winning record? Because it has two of the elite teams in the league? And that contrasts with a division a few years ago where nobody in that division had a winning record. And it was a weak division then, right?

 

So a division where 100% of the teams don't have a winning record is weak, but a division where 75% of the teams don't have a winning record.....for three straight years isn't?

 

If you wanna define the strength of a division based on the number of winning teams it produces, then you have to admit the AFCEast is weak because it has been the only division in football the past three years where 3/4 of all the teams haven't had a winning season.

 

 

 

 

Most divisions have two teams with winning records.....I'd say they are middlin'. Some divisions have 3 winning teams....those are great divisions. The AFCEast is the only division where most of the teams don't have a winning record....for three straight years. Weak.

This post makes no sense.

 

My point is you're pointing to the NFC West as a division that is noticeably stronger than the AFC East. And that's true for today, but that is NOT necessarily true when we're talking about the last 13-17 years, which is the relevant time period for assessing the overall strength of the AFC East during the Patriots' dominance.

[TD Ryan2 316]

FeelinMN,

 

with the 2013 season included, yes, the AFC east has been weak for 2 to 3 seasons - certainly weak for the last 2... arguably weak for the last 3.

But I'm not looking at only the past 3 years... '08, '09'10 are 3 consecutive years where the division was strong... I'm looking at it historically over the past decade + and it's ups and downs across that period really grades out as "average" to me.

[MDC 7,882]

 

Neither have 27 other NFL teams. SuperBowls are hard to win. You would think Eagles fans would understand this just about as well as anyone.

I meant the suspicious timing. You know, three championships *** while cheating, none without cheating.

[FeelingMN 273]

FeelinMN,

 

with the 2013 season included, yes, the AFC east has been weak for 2 to 3 seasons - certainly weak for the last 2... arguably weak for the last 3.

But I'm not looking at only the past 3 years... '08, '09'10 are 3 consecutive years where the division was strong... I'm looking at it historically over the past decade + and it's ups and downs across that period really grades out as "average" to me.

Using the criteria of three losing teams within a division since 2001, you'd be right. Keep in mind that realignment didn't occur until 2002, but doing a quick inspection:

 

The number of times a division had 3 losing teams since 2001:

 

AFCNorth 3

AFCSouth 3

AFCEast 4

NFCEast 4

AFCWest 5

NFCNorth 5

NFCSouth 5

NFCWest 9

 

So clearly, over that span the NFCWest has been the weakest. However, looking at recent history....the past three years....the AFCEast has had three consecutive seasons with three losing teams. Only the NFCWest has done that....they put together a string of about 5 or 6.

 

So since 2001, most divisions have been pretty comparable. NFCWest has been awful over that period. Since 2010 the AFCEast has been the weakest division using this criteria.

[R8RMick 242]

How far back are we talking, historically lol... In the early 90's that division was owned by the Buffalo Bills and their K Gun offense. Other AFC old school fans may remember how Buffalo would blitzkrieg through their pathetic division 8-0 every year, which usually gave them the best record in the AFC, which meant our teams had to play in the cold Buffalo winter come playoff time. I'm not sure the Bills played a road playoff game during any point of their four year consecutive super bowl run.

 

Now that's dominance.

[parrot 789]

Using the criteria of three losing teams within a division since 2001, you'd be right. Keep in mind that realignment didn't occur until 2002, but doing a quick inspection:

 

The number of times a division had 3 losing teams since 2001:

 

AFCNorth 3

AFCSouth 3

AFCEast 4

NFCEast 4

AFCWest 5

NFCNorth 5

NFCSouth 5

NFCWest 9

 

So clearly, over that span the NFCWest has been the weakest. However, looking at recent history....the past three years....the AFCEast has had three consecutive seasons with three losing teams. Only the NFCWest has done that....they put together a string of about 5 or 6.

 

So since 2001, most divisions have been pretty comparable. NFCWest has been awful over that period. Since 2010 the AFCEast has been the weakest division using this criteria.

The AFC East didn't have three "losing teams" this year. They had three teams finish at .500 or better, one of four divisions that did that, which places them in the top half by that criteria. They were one of two divisions where the worst team won at least 6 games, the other being the "Great" NFC West.

[TD Ryan2 316]

So since 2001, most divisions have been pretty comparable. NFCWest has been awful over that period. Since 2010 the AFCEast has been the weakest division using this criteria.

since 2011 the AFC East has been a weak Division - I agree. (If we're picking nits over the "criteria" - there were not 3 "losing" teams in the Div. in 2010 - NYJs were 8-8).

So - Yes. for 3 seasons now, the AFC East has been a weak division.

The AFC East was very strong in 2010 with NE at 14-2 and NYJ at 11-2 - both making the playoffs, NYJ losing in the AFC Championship.

 

 

In the end, I feel confident is saying that it is not factual to suggest that the AFC East has consistently been a weak division thru the Brady/ Belichick era - weak over the past 3 seasons? yes. weak for the majority of 13 seasons? no.

[TD Ryan2 316]

How far back are we talking, historically lol...

there were a few suggestions that the recent success for NE (2001 - present Brady/Belichick) was because the AFC East is weak - so I focused on that time frame.

I didn't really know if that was true, so I went back and looked at the data.

 

Really, anything for NE before Parcells/Bledsoe/and then Kraft was horrible.

The Pats were a second-rate organization thru the 70s and 80s - (no offense to Hannah, Grogan, Stanley Morgan, Tippett, etc).

[FeelingMN 273]

since 2011 the AFC East has been a weak Division - I agree. (If we're picking nits over the "criteria" - there were not 3 "losing" teams in the Div. in 2010 - NYJs were 8-8).

So - Yes. for 3 seasons now, the AFC East has been a weak division.

The AFC East was very strong in 2010 with NE at 14-2 and NYJ at 11-2 - both making the playoffs, NYJ losing in the AFC Championship.

 

 

In the end, I feel confident is saying that it is not factual to suggest that the AFC East has consistently been a weak division thru the Brady/ Belichick era - weak over the past 3 seasons? yes. weak for the majority of 13 seasons? no.

You're right. Since 2011...and not losing teams, but teams .500 or worse.

 

You could argue that from 2001-2010 the AFCEast was the toughest division as they only had one season with 3 teams at/below .500.

 

Really though, who cares. Either the Pats win the SB or they don't. They're one of the few franchises who don't settle for moral victories. A successful season for them is winning the SB. That's all that matters.

 

This whole thing is analogous to people's perception of Peyton Manning as a whiny little b!tch.....yet he was voted as the most respected player in the league by his peers. People see what they want to see....and that's the nature of fandom. But really the only measure of greatness is winning.....and for Manning and the Patriots the only way to cement your legacies is to win the next two games.