Raiders are a top 10 team?

Oh god I hope Palmer doesn't fark this up.

GO PACK GO!!

/Bears Suck
//Vikings Blow

So the Giants get a huge home win, beat the Bills, yet they are just behind the Bills, with the same record.

Right.

Honestly, I don't think the Cowboys should be as low as they are, after a close game against the pats.

/feels dirty saying that
//too damn hiiiiigh...

I'm in 6th place in my Fark FFB league! I have no where else to crow about it.

/pathetic

robsul82: robsul82: Eat my balls, ESPN.

/and for those without the benefit of counting skills, Brady has 8 picks in 4 games as well

Nope, 8 in 5, ESPN's game logs are incorrect. Eat 'em again, not my fault.

DrgnMech: Honestly, I don't think the Cowboys should be as low as they are, after a close game against the pats.

/feels dirty saying that
//too damn hiiiiigh...

The Cowboys are where they should be. The offense looked dreadful against the worst (by numbers) defense in the game. The Cowboys defense can only keep them in games only so much. I wonder what Ratiff said to Romo after he threw that pick against the Pats in 1st quarter... was it "You better stop throwing INTs" or was it "Don't worry, we got your back"?

The shift towards conservative playcalling from Garrett - and lack of Romo asskissing from Jerry - indicates that I'm not the only one sick of Romo's inconsistency.

4NSpy: Raiders are a top 10 team?

Oh god I hope Palmer doesn't fark this up.

They gave up a lot to land him, but he seems the only credible QB option that they had if they indeed plan on being a postseason contender.

well, at least the Texans are in the bottom half of the league, where they belong

Overfiend: GO PACK GO!!

/Bears Suck
//Vikings Blow Swallow

//FTFY

Also, GO PACK GO!!! On Wisconsin!

fawlty: well, at least the Texans are in the bottom half of the league, where they belong

Texans belong at 8-8 forever.

Nabb1: Cyberluddite: So yeah, it makes perfect sense that the Saints would be ranked ahead of the Lions.

That was a disappointing performance for the Saints, but it took four turnovers and a head coach getting his leg destroyed for the Bucs to eek out a one-score win at home. I fully expect that the result will be far different when the Bucs come to New Orleans in a few weeks.

At the very least, the lines can' t possibly play any worse in the Bucs rematch. Brees should not be within one yard of the leading rusher, ever.

Lions should get the nod for the moment, at least until we see how they fare against Atlanta next game. Let the Saints lick their wounds in peace against Indy and St. Louis.

Also, the Ravens are under-ranked, again.

Cagey B: 4NSpy: Raiders are a top 10 team?

Oh god I hope Palmer doesn't fark this up.

They gave up a lot to land him, but he seems the only credible QB option that they had if they indeed plan on being a postseason contender.

I seem to be in the minority of Raiders fans who's happy about the Palmer trade. Raiders are a contender with an average QB and Palmer is a little bit better than Campbell IMO.

And yea, holy shiat 9th. I didn't expect that.

woot

InferiousX: I seem to be in the minority of Raiders fans who's happy about the Palmer trade. Raiders are a contender with an average QB and Palmer is a little bit better than Campbell IMO.

I'm not upset with the trade.....yet. I'll wait a few weeks before judging it.

Yeah the picks are pricey, but the Raiders are pretty young in all the other skill positions. As long as Palmer doesn't throw a bunch of INT's and mess up the Raiders field position, they should be fine with him handing the ball off to RUN DMC and Bush. That was what I loved about Jason Campbell, he might not have been the best, but he rarely screwed up.

GimpyNip: He's not. Campbells last 4 seasons have been better than Palmers. Look it up, fools.

Some players thrive in a change of scenery. Nobody has wanted a change of scenery in the past 4 seasons more than Palmer.

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Quasar: The Steelers' next game is a cupcake (hopefully) at Arizona.

...and then @NE, vs. Bal, @Cin, and then, mercifully, a bye week. Ugh.

I have concerns about the New England and Baltimore games, who wouldn't? But they ought to be able to move the ball against the worst defense in football, and if they can keep the Patriots reasonably at bay they have a good chance. The Ravens, well, that's a grudge game at home, so anything could happen there. I'm not worried about the Bengals. As I said, I don't think they're for real, and it's a division game.

Barring injuries I think the Steelers will do OK in all of those games. As I said from the beginning, that first week was an aberration.

I still think Pittsburgh will win 11-12 games this year.

I'm a New England fan and I can say no game is a gimme with our defense. Everytime they're on the field I become religious.

Misplaced yat: Nabb1: Cyberluddite: So yeah, it makes perfect sense that the Saints would be ranked ahead of the Lions.

That was a disappointing performance for the Saints, but it took four turnovers and a head coach getting his leg destroyed for the Bucs to eek out a one-score win at home. I fully expect that the result will be far different when the Bucs come to New Orleans in a few weeks.

At the very least, the lines can' t possibly play any worse in the Bucs rematch. Brees should not be within one yard of the leading rusher, ever.

Lions should get the nod for the moment, at least until we see how they fare against Atlanta next game. Let the Saints lick their wounds in peace against Indy and St. Louis.

Also, the Ravens are under-ranked, again.

3rd seems right to me. I can't come up with a compelling reason to move them above the Pats or Packers.

4NSpy: As long as Palmer doesn't throw a bunch of INT's and mess up the Raiders field position

You DO realize that we're talking about Carson Palmer, right? He could teach Sexy Rexy all about, "F*ck it, I'm going deep!"

4NSpy: Nobody has wanted a change of scenery in the past 4 seasons more than Palmer.

The city of Detroit would like to have a word with you.

Its the Packers world, the rest are just playing for left-overs

InferiousX: I seem to be in the minority of Raiders fans who's happy about the Palmer trade. Raiders are a contender with an average QB and Palmer is a little bit better than Campbell IMO.

I don't think they had any other choice, really. Boller isn't really a realistic option, Pryor is an unfathomable option at this time, and the other names that were being kicked around (Garrard, Bulger, Delhommewtf) were just awful.

The only other realistic option, IMHO, would have been Orton, and I doubt they wanted to hand draft picks to Denver.

Still no thread about the Bengals stealing the Raiders' lunch, dinner, and tomorrow's breakfast money for Carson Palmer?

I see the Redskins have crossed "Improbable morale-boosting wins" and "Vomit-inducing loses to teams that previously sucked balls" off of their season to-do list so it was inevitable that the quarterback controversy would follow. A guy in my FF league changed his team name from "Edge of Throwgasm" to "The Beck's Cannon" this week. Someone give me a better name than "Unleash the Dragon".

GimpyNip: Garrard's last 4 seasons were better than Palmer's...and he wouldn't have cost a single pick.

And he's getting surgery done on his back.

Nabb1: Cyberluddite: So yeah, it makes perfect sense that the Saints would be ranked ahead of the Lions.

That was a disappointing performance for the Saints, but it took four turnovers and a head coach getting his leg destroyed for the Bucs to eek out a one-score win at home. I fully expect that the result will be far different when the Bucs come to New Orleans in a few weeks.

so two scores?

Go BUCS!

Ok Fark, I'm tired of reading this ranking thread week after week and seeing people make the same two mistakes over and over again, so PLEASE, for the love of FSM, can we all please understand that:

1. These ranking are ordinal, not ratio level data. That means that a team can get worse and go "up" in the rankings. At the same time, a team can get better and go "down" in the rankings. This week, a ranking of X can be VASTLY different than last week's ranking of X. The rankings are not statically meaningful, they are only relatively meaningful. Got it?

2. These are not a measure of past performance. If you want a measure of past performance, just look at the standings. These are INTENTIONALLY not the standings. Power rankings are a measure of a hypothetical future performance. This means that the Saints can lose to a team, and still be ranked above them, because in a hypothetical future, the people making the rankings think the Saints would beat that other team more often than not, even though the Saints lost in the past. Got it?


Now please, will you take 10 seconds out of your life and try and understand these very simple concepts before posting in these damn threads every week?

Thank you.

4NSpy: InferiousX: I seem to be in the minority of Raiders fans who's happy about the Palmer trade. Raiders are a contender with an average QB and Palmer is a little bit better than Campbell IMO.

I'm not upset with the trade.....yet. I'll wait a few weeks before judging it.

Yeah the picks are pricey, but the Raiders are pretty young in all the other skill positions. As long as Palmer doesn't throw a bunch of INT's and mess up the Raiders field position, they should be fine with him handing the ball off to RUN DMC and Bush. That was what I loved about Jason Campbell, he might not have been the best, but he rarely screwed up.

Two first round picks is pricey for just about anyone. For an average QB in the middle of the season, it's robbery.

InferiousX: Cagey B: 4NSpy: Raiders are a top 10 team?

Oh god I hope Palmer doesn't fark this up.

They gave up a lot to land him, but he seems the only credible QB option that they had if they indeed plan on being a postseason contender.

I seem to be in the minority of Raiders fans who's happy about the Palmer trade. Raiders are a contender with an average QB and Palmer is a little bit better than Campbell IMO.

And yea, holy shiat 9th. I didn't expect that.

It's the sacrifice of the entire 2012 draft. If Palmer's a bust, the Raiders are royally boned for a few years.

Adolf Oliver Nipples: hackhix: Bengals have the #1 defense in the league and they're only #18 at 4-2???

/not a bengals fan

Nobody believes they're for real. They haven't played a single game against the Steelers or the Ravens yet, for instance. That's 4 division losses right there.

4 division losses automatically huh? The Ravens, who the Bengals play very well every year and the Stealers, who have more holes in the offensive line than swiss cheese? Might want to retract your assumption. At the beginning of the year I would have agreed with you, but at this point, I think 4 losses is a pretty bold call.

Cyberluddite: So, the Saints have lost two games--one in Week 1 to the team that's been ranked #1 for most or all of the season (no shame in that), and the second to the Bucaneers, the same team that absolutely had their asses handed to them the previous week, losing by 46 points to the Niners.

The Lions, undefeated until last Sunday, have lost one game--a close one to the #4 ranked Niners, the same team that, 9 days ago, absolutely kicked the living shiat out of the team that the Saints were unable to handle last Sunday.

So yeah, it makes perfect sense that the Saints would be ranked ahead of the Lions.

This was my exact thoughts when I saw that. Seriously, I like the Saints and all, but they lost to the Bucs. Who have lost twice. Week 1 to the Lions and then got killed last week by the only team who beat the Lions.

Which means the Saints are ranked higher, with a worse record, despite losing to a worse team than the Lions, who beat the team NO just lost too. Just ridiculous.

/Looking at the votes, 3 of the 5 had it the other way.
//Fox and Kuharsky swung the vote. Most Fox with NO #3 and Det #8.

SuperChuck: Two first round picks is pricey for just about anyone. For an average QB in the middle of the season, it's robbery.

It's a 1st and a conditional second.

/not disagreeing with you, just relaying the info.

Too early to ask where the holy chart is?

Patriots: DFL in YPG allowed but, 19th in PPG allowed. 1st in YPG offense, 3rd in PPG scored.

It took Tony Romo to make the Pats look like they actually have a defense.