Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8
posted at 10/29/2009 4:41 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Power Ratings, Entering Week 8 : "Going back pretty far"? Like 6 weeks? I'm wasn't comparing them to the Pats so what does buffalo have to do with anything? The fact remains just as I stated earlier, the colts have most recently beaten the three biggest NFL cupcakes and barely squeaked by 2 very average teams. The total records of colts opponents this year is 11-26. Does the colts cheering section have any actual facts to dispute that evidence of the colts averageness besides the network's slobbering love affair with saint manning? Please let's start with "well, the pats this and the pats that". I'm talking about your colts. How do you people refute that very average record and defend your position that the colts should be ranked #1?
Posted by unclealfie[/QUOTE]
Actually as a power ranking thread comparing the colts to the pats is relevant, especially since within the thread you put your pats above the colts.
As for a number one ranking, I have never said the colts should be #1. Without a doubt the saints should be there. I'd put the colts at 3 and if you want the vikes there and the colts 4, thats fine, but not the pats above the colts.
As for comparing the colts and pats, the record of the opponents that the pats have beaten is 10-22. Is that really a better record than the record of the colt opponents.
As far as Seattle being one of the worst three worst teams in the league, I disagree. Detroit, Tampa (one of your opponents that is certainly worse than seattle and may be worse than St. Louis), Cleveland, Oakland, and KC are all worse and you could argue Washington and Carolina may be worse.
So, first, by indicating that Seattle was worse than Tampa is only homerism.
Then, you went on to say that the colts beat a slumping Arizona team. Now I don't know how that could be the case when Arizona won on the road by 14 the prior week, but then you've shown that your mind works in mysterious and not always accurate ways. Additionally, the Cards had all of their playmakers, and they have not lost a game since. Homerism
Then suggesting that Baltimore is very good when they struggled at home to beat only defeated KC (The teams were tied with 5 minutes to go in the 4th), and barely beat a mediocre San Diego team, and have lost 3 straight is only attempting to make NE look better.
I don't care where you put Indy in your (and yours alone) rankings. Put Indy 31 if you like, but if you do that, in your rankings NE better be 32.