Hmm CudaHP, it looks like your National Geographic "supercroc" was not a Deinosuchus, but a similar-sized one found in the sahara called
Sarcosuchus imperator.
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/supercroc/
Here is a bit of some info regarding a comparrison between the two. I'd call your "supercroc" that has a narrow jaw more closer to a modern crocodile, while my Deinosuchus is possibly related to the alligator. Either way, you'd still be a "one-bite" snack :shock: :
-----
"Deinosuchus, the subject of much of Schwimmer's research, lived in the Late Cretaceous, which means it's younger than Sarcosuchus. The two species "were not closely related," Schwimmer noted.
The range of Deinosuchus was much of North America. It dwelled from New Jersey to Montana, and was especially common in Texas and Alabama. The first report of the species came in 1858, based on ancient teeth that were discovered in North Carolina, said Schwimmer, who has received research grants from the National Geographic Society.
A number of fairly complete skulls of Deinosuchus have been found, but "we haven't yet put together a full body reconstruction," said Schwimmer. Once that happens, he added, the analysis might show that Deinosuchus was similar in body size or even bigger than Sarcosuchus.
That conjecture is based in part on differences in the snouts of the two species. "Sarcosuchus had a long, narrow snout, so a lot of its length is in the snout," Schwimmer explained. "But Deinosuchus was broad-snouted, built more like an alligator, so a skull of the same length [as Sarcosuchus] would, based on proportional size, be an even bigger animal."