| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
matt79511
Joined: 10 Jul 2011
Posts: 2198
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
The Eagles are EIGHTH?!?!?! in PFT's rankings? That's just terrible. I don't get worked up about power rankings most of the time but come the - on
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
5 Trophies
Joined: 06 Sep 2012
Posts: 36
Location: Arizona
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
That's exactly what I meant. The redskins as of today should be ranked higher than the Saints but I don't give a crap about either team so I'm not going to start a thread about their rankings.
I know rankings don't mean anything but it's just another one of those fun things to see my team at the top of the list. Just like the stats we all check. We know having the #1 ranked offense or defense don't meant squat if they don't win the Super Bowl, but it does give us another thing to brag about and it's a good feeling to see your team up at the top in all the meaningless categories.
_________________
Every year I dream the Cowboys go 19-0 and have the #1 offense and defense in the league!
Romo throws 80 TD's, all receivers have 100 catches, 1500 yards and 20 TD's. Demarcus Ware has 40 sacks, and knocks out every QB he faces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Desperado82
Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 18295
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 5 Trophies wrote: | | Just like the stats we all check. We know having the #1 ranked offense or defense don't meant squat if they don't win the Super Bowl, but it does give us another thing to brag about and it's a good feeling to see your team up at the top in all the meaningless categories. |
The only stats that I'll feel good about seeing this year would be us finishing the season by winning the NFC East, and by making the trip to New Orleans at the end of this season and flying back to Dallas with the 6th Lombardi Trophy.
_________________
^^^mack.
R.I.P. B2TB & SA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Texas_OutLaw7
Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 19397
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Desperado82 wrote: | | 5 Trophies wrote: | | Just like the stats we all check. We know having the #1 ranked offense or defense don't meant squat if they don't win the Super Bowl, but it does give us another thing to brag about and it's a good feeling to see your team up at the top in all the meaningless categories. |
The only stats that I'll feel good about seeing this year would be us finishing the season by winning the NFC East, and by making the trip to New Orleans at the end of this season and flying back to Dallas with the 6th Lombardi Trophy. |
Damn Straight.
ALL ABOARD - CHAMPIONSHIP BOUND!
_________________
In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rtnldave
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2344
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | I wouldn't call a one possession win a "thorough whooping". And its only been one week, so I dont blame anyone for still having the defending Super Bowl champs rated higher than us. The Packers lost and the Vikings won. Should the Vikings be rated higher than the Packers now? |
Uhm, if the Vikings beat the Packers....? YES! 
Also, being a fair man, I will post Brian Billick's rankings for week 2. Last week I ripped him, and justifibly so. But at least HE recognized his error and corrected it. I do believe he is in the ballpark with this line up:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flyingmonkey30
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 5122
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | I wouldn't call a one possession win a "thorough whooping". And its only been one week, so I dont blame anyone for still having the defending Super Bowl champs rated higher than us. The Packers lost and the Vikings won. Should the Vikings be rated higher than the Packers now? |
Uhm, if the Vikings beat the Packers....? YES!
Also, being a fair man, I will post Brian Billick's rankings for week 2. Last week I ripped him, and justifibly so. But at least HE recognized his error and corrected it. I do believe he is in the ballpark with this line up:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings |
Yeah, point out where I said the Vikings beat the Packers. The Vikings won THEIR matchup and Green Bay lost THEIR matchup. For one team to win, and another to lose, they dont have to necessarily play each other
_________________
Check out my draft thread!
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=490478t=447580&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rtnldave
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2344
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | I wouldn't call a one possession win a "thorough whooping". And its only been one week, so I dont blame anyone for still having the defending Super Bowl champs rated higher than us. The Packers lost and the Vikings won. Should the Vikings be rated higher than the Packers now? |
Uhm, if the Vikings beat the Packers....? YES!
Also, being a fair man, I will post Brian Billick's rankings for week 2. Last week I ripped him, and justifibly so. But at least HE recognized his error and corrected it. I do believe he is in the ballpark with this line up:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings |
Yeah, point out where I said the Vikings beat the Packers. The Vikings won THEIR matchup and Green Bay lost THEIR matchup. For one team to win, and another to lose, they dont have to necessarily play each other |
What kind of tree do you think I fell out of? Don't you think I realized that? I was referencing the Cowboys beating the Giants, 2 teams that DID play one another, and the Cowboys won. And according to the Power Rankings we were referencing, the Giants still had a higher ranking than Dallas! I was stating that HAD the Vikings and Packers played similar roles than, Yes I would think the Vikings would and should be ranked higher than the Packers. Agree or disagree?
So, why is it in the case of the Cowboys vs Giants, with the Cowboys being the victor, they are ranked lower?
Simply put, Sarcasim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flyingmonkey30
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 5122
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | I wouldn't call a one possession win a "thorough whooping". And its only been one week, so I dont blame anyone for still having the defending Super Bowl champs rated higher than us. The Packers lost and the Vikings won. Should the Vikings be rated higher than the Packers now? |
Uhm, if the Vikings beat the Packers....? YES!
Also, being a fair man, I will post Brian Billick's rankings for week 2. Last week I ripped him, and justifibly so. But at least HE recognized his error and corrected it. I do believe he is in the ballpark with this line up:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings |
Yeah, point out where I said the Vikings beat the Packers. The Vikings won THEIR matchup and Green Bay lost THEIR matchup. For one team to win, and another to lose, they dont have to necessarily play each other |
What kind of tree do you think I fell out of? Don't you think I realized that? I was referencing the Cowboys beating the Giants, 2 teams that DID play one another, and the Cowboys won. And according to the Power Rankings we were referencing, the Giants still had a higher ranking than Dallas! I was stating that HAD the Vikings and Packers played similar roles than, Yes I would think the Vikings would and should be ranked higher than the Packers. Agree or disagree?
So, why is it in the case of the Cowboys vs Giants, with the Cowboys being the victor, they are ranked lower?
Simply put, Sarcasim |
Oh, see, I didn't see the word if. My bad on that one.
But then that would mean that you think the Redskins should be rated higher than the Saints, correct?
And I completely disagree that if the Vikings beat the Packers in week one that they should be ranked ahead of them. Not in the 2012 season at least
_________________
Check out my draft thread!
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=490478t=447580&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rtnldave
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2344
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | I wouldn't call a one possession win a "thorough whooping". And its only been one week, so I dont blame anyone for still having the defending Super Bowl champs rated higher than us. The Packers lost and the Vikings won. Should the Vikings be rated higher than the Packers now? |
Uhm, if the Vikings beat the Packers....? YES!
Also, being a fair man, I will post Brian Billick's rankings for week 2. Last week I ripped him, and justifibly so. But at least HE recognized his error and corrected it. I do believe he is in the ballpark with this line up:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings |
Yeah, point out where I said the Vikings beat the Packers. The Vikings won THEIR matchup and Green Bay lost THEIR matchup. For one team to win, and another to lose, they dont have to necessarily play each other |
What kind of tree do you think I fell out of? Don't you think I realized that? I was referencing the Cowboys beating the Giants, 2 teams that DID play one another, and the Cowboys won. And according to the Power Rankings we were referencing, the Giants still had a higher ranking than Dallas! I was stating that HAD the Vikings and Packers played similar roles than, Yes I would think the Vikings would and should be ranked higher than the Packers. Agree or disagree?
So, why is it in the case of the Cowboys vs Giants, with the Cowboys being the victor, they are ranked lower?
Simply put, Sarcasim |
Oh, see, I didn't see the word if. My bad on that one.
But then that would mean that you think the Redskins should be rated higher than the Saints, correct?
And I completely disagree that if the Vikings beat the Packers in week one that they should be ranked ahead of them. Not in the 2012 season at least |
Well sir, then we have arrived at an impass. I believe it is time to envoke that oldest and noblest of traditions by employing the democratic process and exercising our inalienable rights to settle this matter peacfully, rationally, ecumenically and gramitcally by arriving at the mutual understanding of pacifism for the greater good and engaging in the process of agreeing to disagree.
Good day to you sir.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Desperado82
Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 18295
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | I wouldn't call a one possession win a "thorough whooping". And its only been one week, so I dont blame anyone for still having the defending Super Bowl champs rated higher than us. The Packers lost and the Vikings won. Should the Vikings be rated higher than the Packers now? |
Uhm, if the Vikings beat the Packers....? YES!
Also, being a fair man, I will post Brian Billick's rankings for week 2. Last week I ripped him, and justifibly so. But at least HE recognized his error and corrected it. I do believe he is in the ballpark with this line up:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings |
Yeah, point out where I said the Vikings beat the Packers. The Vikings won THEIR matchup and Green Bay lost THEIR matchup. For one team to win, and another to lose, they dont have to necessarily play each other |
What kind of tree do you think I fell out of? Don't you think I realized that? I was referencing the Cowboys beating the Giants, 2 teams that DID play one another, and the Cowboys won. And according to the Power Rankings we were referencing, the Giants still had a higher ranking than Dallas! I was stating that HAD the Vikings and Packers played similar roles than, Yes I would think the Vikings would and should be ranked higher than the Packers. Agree or disagree?
So, why is it in the case of the Cowboys vs Giants, with the Cowboys being the victor, they are ranked lower?
Simply put, Sarcasim |
Oh, see, I didn't see the word if. My bad on that one.
But then that would mean that you think the Redskins should be rated higher than the Saints, correct?
And I completely disagree that if the Vikings beat the Packers in week one that they should be ranked ahead of them. Not in the 2012 season at least |
Well sir, then we have arrived at an impass. I believe it is time to envoke that oldest and noblest of traditions by employing the democratic process and exercising our inalienable rights to settle this matter peacfully, rationally, ecumenically and gramitcally by arriving at the mutual understanding of pacifism for the greater good and engaging in the process of agreeing to disagree.
Good day to you sir. |
Pssh...I say you two go out and have a good ol' Texas quick draw to decide who wins the debate.
_________________
^^^mack.
R.I.P. B2TB & SA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flyingmonkey30
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 5122
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | I wouldn't call a one possession win a "thorough whooping". And its only been one week, so I dont blame anyone for still having the defending Super Bowl champs rated higher than us. The Packers lost and the Vikings won. Should the Vikings be rated higher than the Packers now? |
Uhm, if the Vikings beat the Packers....? YES!
Also, being a fair man, I will post Brian Billick's rankings for week 2. Last week I ripped him, and justifibly so. But at least HE recognized his error and corrected it. I do believe he is in the ballpark with this line up:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings |
Yeah, point out where I said the Vikings beat the Packers. The Vikings won THEIR matchup and Green Bay lost THEIR matchup. For one team to win, and another to lose, they dont have to necessarily play each other |
What kind of tree do you think I fell out of? Don't you think I realized that? I was referencing the Cowboys beating the Giants, 2 teams that DID play one another, and the Cowboys won. And according to the Power Rankings we were referencing, the Giants still had a higher ranking than Dallas! I was stating that HAD the Vikings and Packers played similar roles than, Yes I would think the Vikings would and should be ranked higher than the Packers. Agree or disagree?
So, why is it in the case of the Cowboys vs Giants, with the Cowboys being the victor, they are ranked lower?
Simply put, Sarcasim |
Oh, see, I didn't see the word if. My bad on that one.
But then that would mean that you think the Redskins should be rated higher than the Saints, correct?
And I completely disagree that if the Vikings beat the Packers in week one that they should be ranked ahead of them. Not in the 2012 season at least |
Well sir, then we have arrived at an impass. I believe it is time to envoke that oldest and noblest of traditions by employing the democratic process and exercising our inalienable rights to settle this matter peacfully, rationally, ecumenically and gramitcally by arriving at the mutual understanding of pacifism for the greater good and engaging in the process of agreeing to disagree.
Good day to you sir. |
LOL, great debating with you Dave, as always. Looking forward to the next one
_________________
Check out my draft thread!
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=490478t=447580&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DallasPride28
Joined: 16 Mar 2010
Posts: 1983
Location: Ohio
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I personally like that were flying under the radar on this power ranking thing or anything for that matter. its a nice change from the past few years of hype we get from the media.
_________________
Adopt-A-Cowboy(Dez Bryant)
46 catches, 706 yards, 7 touchdown, 15.3 average |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rtnldave
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2344
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | Rtnldave wrote: | | flyingmonkey30 wrote: | | I wouldn't call a one possession win a "thorough whooping". And its only been one week, so I dont blame anyone for still having the defending Super Bowl champs rated higher than us. The Packers lost and the Vikings won. Should the Vikings be rated higher than the Packers now? |
Uhm, if the Vikings beat the Packers....? YES!
Also, being a fair man, I will post Brian Billick's rankings for week 2. Last week I ripped him, and justifibly so. But at least HE recognized his error and corrected it. I do believe he is in the ballpark with this line up:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings |
Yeah, point out where I said the Vikings beat the Packers. The Vikings won THEIR matchup and Green Bay lost THEIR matchup. For one team to win, and another to lose, they dont have to necessarily play each other |
What kind of tree do you think I fell out of? Don't you think I realized that? I was referencing the Cowboys beating the Giants, 2 teams that DID play one another, and the Cowboys won. And according to the Power Rankings we were referencing, the Giants still had a higher ranking than Dallas! I was stating that HAD the Vikings and Packers played similar roles than, Yes I would think the Vikings would and should be ranked higher than the Packers. Agree or disagree?
So, why is it in the case of the Cowboys vs Giants, with the Cowboys being the victor, they are ranked lower?
Simply put, Sarcasim |
Oh, see, I didn't see the word if. My bad on that one.
But then that would mean that you think the Redskins should be rated higher than the Saints, correct?
And I completely disagree that if the Vikings beat the Packers in week one that they should be ranked ahead of them. Not in the 2012 season at least |
Well sir, then we have arrived at an impass. I believe it is time to envoke that oldest and noblest of traditions by employing the democratic process and exercising our inalienable rights to settle this matter peacfully, rationally, ecumenically and gramitcally by arriving at the mutual understanding of pacifism for the greater good and engaging in the process of agreeing to disagree.
Good day to you sir. |
LOL, great debating with you Dave, as always. Looking forward to the next one |
Likewise my friend!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
5 Trophies
Joined: 06 Sep 2012
Posts: 36
Location: Arizona
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I just read a very thorough article on ESPN that details how "most" of the people involved with these Power rankings make their determinations. Here is the best quote that sums things up for me at least;
"Overall Rankings put a small emphasis on how one team performs against another one on any given day and may not necessarily reflect the overall power rankings of that particular team"
Basically saying that if Arizona was to upset New England this weekend it does not mean the Cardinals will move ahead of the Patriots in the Power Rankings, but New England would fall in the rankings due to the loss to an inferior opponent.
Lets get on with the [inappropriate/removed] whipping of the Seahawks and while we are at it, lets have a little Pick em to see how high the Cowboys can get in the Power Rankings. just for fun, I say they crack the top 5 (4 overall) by week 4
_________________
Every year I dream the Cowboys go 19-0 and have the #1 offense and defense in the league!
Romo throws 80 TD's, all receivers have 100 catches, 1500 yards and 20 TD's. Demarcus Ware has 40 sacks, and knocks out every QB he faces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
