My rankings of all 28 teams

[icypots]

A few things:

-I'm totally new here, so forgive me if this topic has come up before

-This is assuming head-to-head play against another human. I am not considering at all how well each team is to have against the computer.

-I never change playbooks nor do I allow my opponent to, so the playbooks are definitely taken into account when ranking the teams.

-I just started playing this game again today. I played it a ton in college. And I'm going by memory a lot here, so some of these could be off just because I'm forgetting certain aspects of certain teams.

-Everyone, feel free to critique my rankings and post your own.

Tier #1

1. Philly

2. SF

3. Hous

4. Chicago

5. NY Giants

Tier #2

6. LA Raiders

7. Detroit

8. Pittsburgh

9. Tampa Bay

Tier #3

10. Buffalo

11. Miami

12. KC

13. Cincy

Tier #4

14. LA Rams

15. Atlanta

16. GB

17. Cleveland

18. Washington

19. NY Jets

20. NO

21. Minnesota

22. NE

Tier #5

23. Denver

24. SD

25. Indy

26. Dallas

27. Phoenix

28. Seattle

[Marcules85]

Buffalo should be moved up to Tier #1 or #2.

[Slig]

its a nice effort but I am in almost complete disagreement with you. If I made a list the correlation between it and yours would be quite weak.

Tier #1

1. SF

2. Buffalo

3. Houston

4. NY Giants

5. LA Raiders

Tier #2

6. Philly

7. Chicago

8. KC

9. Miami

10. Washington

11. Cincy

12. LA Rams

Tier #3

13. Detroit

14. Dallas

15. NO

16. Tampa Bay

17. SD

18. NY Jets

19. Minnesota

20. Denver

21. Pittsburgh

22. Cleveland

Tier #4

23. Atlanta

24. GB

25. Phoenix

26. Indy

27. NE

28. Seattle

[icypots]

Thanks for the reply...ok, lets debate a little.

On your rankings of Chicago and Philly: Yes, these teams have weaknesses. Chicago has a poor passing game, and Philly has a poor pass defense. However, imo these teams have absolutely dominating facets of their games- and that is very important in head-to-head play. Philly with QB Eagles and the Bears with their rushing attack...both are nearly unstoppable imo. And then they both have above average defenses as well.

Buffalo- I realize this team has good players, but for some reason, I never play well with them nor is it hard for me to defeat them easily. Maybe its that I don't like having to use a d-lineman, so I don't have a great defensive player to use. I'm also not a huge fan of their playbook, although it certainly isn't the worst in the game.

Washington- No way that they can be so high with that playbook that lets your opponent narrow down what play you're going to run by a huge margin before the snap.

NE- not that bad at all imo. Fryar catches a lot, they have a good playbook, and their defense is average imo.

Pittsburgh- one of the best team defenses in the game(although they have no speedy stars)...no way they should be that low.

Anyway, I didn't want to argue every ranking, so I just picked out a few to start....feel free to debate back- its all in good fun.

P.S. I'm new here, and I'm really trying to be able to play online. If you have a second please see my other post in this forum...I'd love to be able to join some leagues here and stuff, but I'm having connection problems as of now. TIA.

[fro30]

http://www.sois.com/tpc/main.php

go there and look at the xfactor table to see a very solid list

your list isnt too good

[FulcherVulture]

I do believe in the tier system. It seems teams are competitive/equal within a bracket. To beat a team in a higher tier is much harder.

I understand your point that your weighing in the Default playbooks. I just think being strict to that makes you miss out on so much more of the game. Buffalo is so vulverable with a blitz up the middle, thus your low ranking. Take that out and there a top team.

Another thing is that you may think your good, but if you were to play someone who change around the playbook to fit a team, they'd probably light you up. You must know how to play defense against less predictable plays.

[Stadawim]

Yeah, there's been others but it's always good to rehash and see what others think.

I've never tried to 'tier' it. Hmmm....

T1

NY Giants

SF 49ers

CHI Bears

BUF Bills

CIN Bengals

HOU Oilers

T2

MIA Dolphins

KC Chiefs

OAK Raiders

SD Chargers

DET Lions

PHI Eagles

T3

WAS Redskins

MIN Vikings

ATL Falcons

TB Buccaneers

PIT Steelers

NO Saints

DEN Broncos

NY Jets

T4

PHO Cardinals

DAL Cowboys

CLE Browns

LA Rams

T5

NE Patriots

GB Packers

SEA Seahawks

IND Colts

I was really trying to ensure there were even numbers in each tier, but it was just too hard for a couple of teams to not be broken down the way they were. And i believe i put these in an accurate order as well.

EDIT: See? I did this right!

[icypots]

Another thing is that you may think your good, but if you were to play someone who change around the playbook to fit a team, they'd probably light you up. You must know how to play defense against less predictable plays.

See, I've always found it to be quite the opposite...

I've found tons of people who are great when they play with a great team and their 8 favorite plays. But when you ask them to actually play with a less than stellar playbook, it turns out that they really aren't that good of a player after all. Bottom line: Any bum can learn how to play using only the 8 best plays in the game- It takes a real great player to be good with a poor playbook. JMHO.

[icypots]

>http://www.sois.com/tpc/main.php

go there and look at the xfactor table to see a very solid list

your list isnt too good

I don't see how you can claim that my list "isn't too good" when it is an objective study. There is absolutely no way that N.E. should be rated that low. I would definitely play for big money with them against any opponent, and I'll pick your team and it'll be a team that list has rated ahead of them.

I would also gladly take the Giants, Eagles, or Bears against any human playing as the Raiders.

[icypots]

Yeah, there's been others but it's always good to rehash and see what others think.

I've never tried to 'tier' it. Hmmm....

T1

NY Giants

SF 49ers

CHI Bears

BUF Bills

CIN Bengals

HOU Oilers

T2

MIA Dolphins

KC Chiefs

OAK Raiders

SD Chargers

DET Lions

PHI Eagles

T3

WAS Redskins

MIN Vikings

ATL Falcons

PIT Steelers

NO Saints

DEN Broncos

NY Jets

T4

TB Buccaneers

PHO Cardinals

DAL Cowboys

CLE Browns

T5

LA Rams

NE Patriots

GB Packers

SEA Seahawks

IND Colts

I was really trying to ensure there were even numbers in each tier, but it was just too hard for a couple of teams to not be broken down the way they were. And i believe i put these in an accurate order as well.

Rather than argue, I'll just ask you to comment on some rankings that I may disagree with:

Why do you think the Giants are the best team in the entire game?

Why do you rank Cincy so highly?

How do you rank the Eagles so low? Have you ever played against someone who can really use QB Eagles well? Have you not seen how impossible that is to defend?

How can you rank the Redskins so highly with their terrible playbook? Same thing for Denver.

How is Pittsburgh not higher with their defense?

P.S. Just so you all know- I'm not trying to be confrontational here. I just really enjoy debating these issue. But please know that I appriciate the input and differing opinions always.

[fro30]

There is absolutely no way that N.E. should be rated that low. I would definitely play for big money with them against any opponent, and I'll pick your team and it'll be a team that list has rated ahead of them.

Bro when you sign up for TPC let me know.

I'll be SD and you can be NE.

Untill then shut your mouth. And after I beat you keep your mouth shut.

[yo136]

How do you have anyone below Indy?

[icypots]

There is absolutely no way that N.E. should be rated that low. I would definitely play for big money with them against any opponent, and I'll pick your team and it'll be a team that list has rated ahead of them.

Bro when you sign up for TPC let me know.

I'll be SD and you can be NE.

Untill then shut your mouth. And after I beat you keep your mouth shut.

What is TPC(I'm really new here)?

I'm having a lot of trouble connecting to online play, but I'd gladly play you if I connect. Right now I'm using Nesticle. I have a cable modem and a wireless router- I think that may be part of the problem. Any help?

An no....you picking your team is not part of the deal. I said " I'll pick your team and it'll be a team that list has rated ahead of them."

-Looking forward to some good competition

[Angelus]

I always thought Dallas was a very good, balanced team. I would rate them higher than most of you guys. Solid passing game with a great TE. Good O-line with a young Emmitt. Great corners with a decent pass rush.

[Slig]

Thanks for the reply...ok, lets debate a little.

On your rankings of Chicago and Philly: Yes, these teams have weaknesses. Chicago has a poor passing game, and Philly has a poor pass defense. However, imo these teams have absolutely dominating facets of their games- and that is very important in head-to-head play. Philly with QB Eagles and the Bears with their rushing attack...both are nearly unstoppable imo. And then they both have above average defenses as well.

I agree that both of these teams are very good. I just think that teams like San Fransisco, Raiders and Houston are better. It is true that Chicago has a great defense, possibly the 2nd best in the game. However, their passing game is the worst in the game and that drops them. It is hard to have an effective offense if you aren't a 2 way threat. I don't know what you're talking about when you say Philly has an above average defense. Besides Reggie White their defense is basically worthless. As I remember they do have an above average linebacker but he's in the worst position. Philly's rushing game is also extremely pathetic. Of course you can scramble effectively with QB Eagles but Keith Byars and Heath Sherman are the worst running duo in the game.

Buffalo- I realize this team has good players, but for some reason, I never play well with them nor is it hard for me to defeat them easily. Maybe its that I don't like having to use a d-lineman, so I don't have a great defensive player to use. I'm also not a huge fan of their playbook, although it certainly isn't the worst in the game.

They have the best offense in the game. They have the best lineman in the game who dominates without you controlling him and Cornelius Bennet. They also have great speed on special teams. What the fuck more do you want?

If you don't like the playbook, change it...it isn't that hard.

Washington- No way that they can be so high with that playbook that lets your opponent narrow down what play you're going to run by a huge margin before the snap.

Once again your playbook comment is absolutely ridiculous. Default playbooks mean absolutely nothing.

NE- not that bad at all imo. Fryar catches a lot, they have a good playbook, and their defense is average imo.

they have an average defense but they have the 2nd or 3rd worst offense in the game. Good luck scoring on any team besides Cleveland and Indianapolis with that pathetic running game. I can run faster than John Stephen with my pants around my ankles.

Pittsburgh- one of the best team defenses in the game(although they have no speedy stars)...no way they should be that low.

the only thing saving this team from the bottom is their defense and special teams. They have the worst offense in the game. Bubby Brister has a 50% chance of bombing the ball 30 yards out of bounds and their running game is awful. Their defense can keep them in games but in the end it usually won't save them. I beat J-Diddy in the superbowl as Dallas and he was Pittsburgh. He played awesome D but in the end I was able to drive the ball and score on him, winning 10-7.

[icypots]

There is absolutely no way that N.E. should be rated that low. I would definitely play for big money with them against any opponent, and I'll pick your team and it'll be a team that list has rated ahead of them.

Bro when you sign up for TPC let me know.

I'll be SD and you can be NE.

Untill then shut your mouth. And after I beat you keep your mouth shut.

What is TPC(I'm really new here)?

I'm having a lot of trouble connecting to online play, but I'd gladly play you if I connect. Right now I'm using Nesticle. I have a cable modem and a wireless router- I think that may be part of the problem. Any help?

An no....you picking your team is not part of the deal. I said " I'll pick your team and it'll be a team that list has rated ahead of them."

-Looking forward to some good competition

Ok, I've gotten connected. If you want to play now, I'm willing to do it.

[icypots]

If you don't like the playbook, change it...it isn't that hard.

.

I specifically addressed this in my first post.

When my friends and I play, we don't allow changing playbooks. Imo, any bum can master 8 plays and be good. It takes a real good player to be able to play with any playbook. Therefore, in these rankings, I'm taking playbooks definitely into consideration.

[icypots]

Once again your playbook comment is absolutely ridiculous. Default playbooks mean absolutely nothing.

.

Look, I said in my initial post in this thread that we are discussing the teams with playbooks playing a role. If you want to start a thread about ranking the teams disregarding their playbooks, then fine- you are free to go start your own thread. But this thread is about ranking the teams and taking the playbooks into consideration.

[Slig]

Look, I said in my initial post in this thread that we are discussing the teams with playbooks playing a role. If you want to start a thread about ranking the teams disregarding their playbooks, then fine- you are free to go start your own thread. But this thread is about ranking the teams and taking the playbooks into consideration.

Dude, you need to forget about original playbooks. You and your friends are missing out on like 50% of the game by leaving the original playbooks. It isn't Washington's fault they have a shitty playbook. Otherwise they have a pretty damn good team. Just go into team data and playbook editor. You'll be amazed.

[icypots]

Look, I said in my initial post in this thread that we are discussing the teams with playbooks playing a role. If you want to start a thread about ranking the teams disregarding their playbooks, then fine- you are free to go start your own thread. But this thread is about ranking the teams and taking the playbooks into consideration.

Dude, you need to forget about original playbooks. You and your friends are missing out on like 50% of the game by leaving the original playbooks. It isn't Washington's fault they have a shitty playbook. Otherwise they have a pretty damn good team. Just go into team data and playbook editor. You'll be amazed.

I've tried it both ways. I like keeping the playbooks far better. First let me explain what exactly we do:

We draft all 28 teams, so that we each have 14. Then we start playing games. You can pick any of your 14 teams, but if you lose, then that team is out. When one player is out of teams, the game is over and they lose. It usually takes about 6 hours to get through this, but its a ton of fun.

IMO...this is the best possible test of Tecmo skill because it forces you to play with a wide variety of talent level and different plays.

Now, as I said, we have tried the same thing allowing play changing. And we both thought that it was far worse! First of all, it got boring since every game we played had the same exact plays. Secondly, offenses went way up, as we both mastered those 8 plays totally.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Anyone can be great using the 8 best plays in the game. It takes real skill to win with an average playbook.

JMHO.

[Slig]

I don't think there is such thing as the ¨8 best plays.¨ Different playbook settings work for different teams. Teams that have one good running back and a good passing attack make best use of the run and shoot offense while teams with a good running back and good fullback can utilize the 2 back set. I think its a good challenge to find the best possible playbook for any given team and at the same time you're getting your teams to perform how they should, not by the lame default playbooks they're given.

[icypots]

I don't think there is such thing as the ¨8 best plays.¨ Different playbook settings work for different teams. Teams that have one good running back and a good passing attack make best use of the run and shoot offense while teams with a good running back and good fullback can utilize the 2 back set. I think its a good challenge to find the best possible playbook for any given team and at the same time you're getting your teams to perform how they should, not by the lame default playbooks they're given.

fair enough...I'm not trying to convince you of anything- Just saying how I personally like to play. You may be right that there aren't "8 best plays", but I think that even you'd have to admit that if we played under this format, we'd be seeing several teams with very similar playbooks- That gets repetitive and boring imo. I enjoy that fact that while the default playbooks aren't always the best, they make each team unique and different.

Either way...I'd be willing to play in any leagues with either default playbooks or ones changed.

[fro30]

IMO...this is the best possible test of Tecmo skill because it forces you to play with a wide variety of talent level and different plays.

What skill is needed to tackle a QB when he's rolling out?

What skill is needed to tackle rb on a fake reverse or on a reverse before he can get the ball off?

What skill is needed to tackle the QB before he gets the ball on a flea flicker?

None.

When you join TPC let me know.

[icypots]

IMO...this is the best possible test of Tecmo skill because it forces you to play with a wide variety of talent level and different plays.

What skill is needed to tackle a QB when he's rolling out?

What skill is needed to tackle rb on a fake reverse or on a reverse before he can get the ball off?

What skill is needed to tackle the QB before he gets the ball on a flea flicker?

None.

When you join TPC let me know.

I'm not sure I understand your point.

What I'm saying is that it takes more skill to USE these plays.

[Stadawim]

Why do you think the Giants are the best team in the entire game?

Personal experience. I base answers like these on four seasons me and some neighborhood buddies played together. We were all good with different teams, and usually drafted the lower level teams to help them out. The Giants could not be stopped by anybody consistently and effectively. They were the only team to get through one season undefeated and were in the postseason all four seasons with two Super Bowl wins. No other team came close.

Why do you rank Cincy so highly?

Since my first sentence essentially is the base answer for all of these, i'll add on for the rest. For some reason no matter who got Cincinnati, they really could dominate. Courtesy of mainly one man (i'll let you guess who that may be), their pass defense was outstanding. Being them i once intercepted my buds' John Elway four times in a row in one quarter of play. And the other big reason - they ALWAYS had the mighty Oilers number when it mattered. I believe their head-to-head records for regular season play was 5-3 in favor of the Oilers. But it was the postseason where it really mattered. Again these were two teams that made the postseason in all four of our seasons, and the Bengals made it to the Super Bowl twice like the Giants (only to lose them both). But on their way they conquered the Oilers not once, not twice, but three times. We all still agree that although the postseason record of the Bengals was obviously better, the Oilers still should have the upper hand.

How do you rank the Eagles so low? Have you ever played against someone who can really use QB Eagles well? Have you not seen how impossible that is to defend?

Apparently (obviously), not one of us got this 'QB Eagles is God' memo. A couple of us could use him really well. Trouble is, ALL of us were a lot better at defense than offense. To the extent that if any of us ever played the Eagles, chances were R4 was the only defensive set called the whole game while we defended the others manually (you know, like what you do with the Raiders).

How can you rank the Redskins so highly with their terrible playbook? Same thing for Denver.

Again, another memoless situation. Never seemed to have that much trouble with their playbooks. As long as you stayed away from that 2TE set (for Denver) and that full motion 3wing with a hole (for Washington) play, you were pretty much alright.

How is Pittsburgh not higher with their defense?

Simple, the offense SUCKED. And in the Tecmo Super Bowl world, defense DOES NOT win games. (Not like in TSB3, anyway. It's there where Pittsburgh's' defense really shines) And truthfully, their defense wasn't the greatest - while they almost always led the league with passing defense, their rushing defense was atrocious at times.