If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   The Saints are marching, the Buccaneers are sinking, and the Cardinals keep getting trapped. Here is your OFFICIAL Week 8 Power Rankings Thread   (espn.go.com) divider line 190
    More: Amusing, Cardinals, pirates, NFL, rankings, John Harbaugh, Jamison Hensley, Christian Ponder, Chargers  
•       •       •

3928 clicks; posted to Sports » on 23 Oct 2012 at 4:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



190 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-23 10:09:57 PM
I'm cautiously optimistic that the Bears could make a postseason run this year.
 
2012-10-23 10:36:33 PM

germ78: I'm cautiously optimistic that the Bears could make a postseason run this year.


Looking at the schedules.. it gets tough. Basically, the next two weeks are must win for the Bears against Carolina and Tennessee. After that, hope for 4-4. This is if you want the Bears to get in on their own merit at 11-5 or better.

As a hater, you can hope the NFC West shiats the bed with Seattle and Arizona finishing 8-8 or worse (hey why not, Arizona is already in a downward spiral), and no one in the NFC East steps up.
 
2012-10-23 10:46:38 PM

Nadie_AZ: Worst decision they could have made (besides not rebuilding Kurt Warner -ala Barry in Archer- so he could sling TDs for Jesus). Quan should have retired a Cardinal. I'm surprised they are going to let Adrian Wilson do this. Also, why isn't Larry Centers in the ring of fame?




no, that was iretrievably broken; Boldin insisted he was promised a new deal, Graves et al said they only discussed a new deal. i mean, i wasn't there. but when things broke down, Q said he was promised something and the Cards reneged (local STR), when the same guys on STR said they hadn't promised dick.

Whomever was right doesn't matter. The feelings were genuine and there was no way he was coming back. That decision cannot be put on the 'Chise, and equally cannot be attributed to Q.
 
2012-10-23 10:55:28 PM

HaywoodJablonski: So... beat the 5th ranked team by 30 and drop below the team that beat the 12th ranked team on a last-second 77-yard bomb.

Got it.


ESPN adds one ranking level to any team in the Northeast.
Two if they play home games in Northern New Jersey.
 
2012-10-23 11:08:42 PM
The Vikings are too damn high. Also, their schedule for the second half of the season is flat out brutal. 2 games each against Chicago and Green Bay, plus road games @ Seattle and Houston. I'll be impressed if they can finish the season by going 4-5.
 
2012-10-23 11:17:26 PM

This Looks Fun: Di Atribe: Also, graph 2 4 u

Di (or anyone else really),
I know it's been explained before, but can you refresh my memory on the meaning of this graph and how to interpret it? Or, to phrase another way, "according to this graph, is Minnesota beating Green Bay?"


Don't need a graph to answer that with a "no"
 
2012-10-23 11:52:42 PM

Kuta: So lemme get this straight:

Last week's
#3 New York Giants eke out a win against traditionally weak as of late #15 Redskins.

Meanwhile
#3 Houston Texans blow out traditionally strong as of late #4 Baltimore Ravens...

And the Giant's move up to #2?


Crazy, but this blog post explains it.
It's just a quirk in the way ESPN makes these rankings. Copy pasted for those too lazy to click and scroll:

"The Houston Texans might have only themselves to blame for falling one spot in ESPN's NFL Power Rankings heading into Week 8.

They might have defeated the Baltimore Ravens too convincingly, silly as it sounds.

The idle Atlanta Falcons naturally remained No. 1 as the lone undefeated team.

The Texans and New York Giants had been tied at No. 2 last week. Houston had prevailed for the second spot on a tiebreaker. But with the Texans trouncing Baltimore 43-13, the Ravens fell hard -- clearing the way for the Giants to make significant gains on two of our voters' ballots.

Those gains left the Giants with a slightly higher average ranking than the Texans, 2.4 to 2.6. Houston, you see, had been ranked third across the board. The Texans had less room for improvement, particularly with the Giants also winning Sunday.

Three of our five voters -- Dan Graziano, Ashley Fox and me -- already had the Giants second a week ago. The other two voters had them only fifth (John Clayton) and fourth (Jamison Hensley).

The Texans won big, and the Giants won narrowly.

Graziano, Fox and I left the Giants at No. 2.

Clayton and Hensley moved the Giants up to third, and both left the Texans second on their ballots.

I wondered what might have happened if Houston had, say, survived an overtime thriller against the Ravens, with both teams looking good. Clayton and Hensley could have justified ranking the Ravens third and Giants fourth while leaving the Falcons and Texans as their top two teams. I do not know whether they would have done this, but it would have been defensible.

Had that happened, the Texans would have edged the Giants for second in the rankings. But because the Texans dominated the Ravens so thoroughly, it left no doubt that the Giants should be ranked higher than Baltimore should be ranked -- at the expense of Houston in the rankings."
 
2012-10-24 12:14:28 AM

prickly pete v2: This Looks Fun: Di Atribe: Also, graph 2 4 u

Di (or anyone else really),
I know it's been explained before, but can you refresh my memory on the meaning of this graph and how to interpret it? Or, to phrase another way, "according to this graph, is Minnesota beating Green Bay?"

Don't need a graph to answer that with a "no"


I think the MIN/GB games will be awesome. They have similar point differentials (which is my favorite stat when judging "power" since it takes both sides of the line into account), Rodgers is just about always a beast, but the GB defense isn't great against the run. Naturally I hope for GB to lose these games, because I'd rather go against MIN if necessary in the playoffs. Well, I'd rather play GB and get revenge for last time, but who knows if that would happen. Cutler has an issue with GB.

/Bears fan
/still bitter over a few years ago
 
2012-10-24 12:31:54 AM

Supes: It's just a quirk in the way ESPN makes these rankings. Copy pasted for those too lazy to click and scroll:

"The Houston Texans might have only themselves to blame for falling one spot in ESPN's NFL Power Rankings heading into Week 8.

They might have defeated the Baltimore Ravens too convincingly, silly as it sounds.

The idle Atlanta Falcons naturally remained No. 1 as the lone undefeated team.

The Texans and New York Giants had been tied at No. 2 last week. Houston had prevailed for the second spot on a tiebreaker. But with the Texans trouncing Baltimore 43-13, the Ravens fell hard -- clearing the way for the Giants to make significant gains on two of our voters' ballots.

Those gains left the Giants with a slightly higher average ranking than the Texans, 2.4 to 2.6. Houston, you see, had been ranked third across the board. The Texans had less room for improvement, particularly with the Giants also winning Sunday.

Three of our five voters -- Dan Graziano, Ashley Fox and me -- already had the Giants second a week ago. The other two voters had them only fifth (John Clayton) and fourth (Jamison Hensley).

The Texans won big, and the Giants won narrowly.

Graziano, Fox and I left the Giants at No. 2.


Clayton and Hensley moved the Giants up to third, and both left the Texans second on their ballots.

I wondered what might have happened if Houston had, say, survived an overtime thriller against the Ravens, with both teams looking good. Clayton and Hensley could have justified ranking the Ravens third and Giants fourth while leaving the Falcons and Texans as their top two teams. I do not know whether they would have done this, but it would have been defensible.

Had that happened, the Texans would have edged the Giants for second in the rankings. But because the Texans dominated the Ravens so thoroughly, it left no doubt that the Giants should be ranked higher than Baltimore should be ranked -- at the expense of Houston in the rankings."


And right there is where his whole explanation tips over onto its side and shatters into a thousand pieces of dried bull crap.
 
2012-10-24 12:43:20 AM

mikaloyd: And right there is where his whole explanation tips over onto its side and shatters into a thousand pieces of dried bull crap.


No, the explanation makes sense. But it also shows quite clearly why averaging ordinal data is for 'tards.
 
2012-10-24 01:00:52 AM

robsul82: *twinkling piano notes*


You did us all and, most of all, yourself proud with that one. Bravo, good sir...bravo!
 
2012-10-24 01:10:19 AM

Nabb1: The Saints' offense is spectacular, but that defense has got to do something. Josh Freeman absolutely shredded the Saints D and they were lucky to escape that game with a win.


And the saints O is why loaded my FFteam with Brees, sproles, and colston. 5-2 tied for 1st
 
2012-10-24 01:35:27 AM
This is one of my must-read threads on Fark, and one of the reasons to look forward to Tuesdays during football season. Thanks for the graphs, obscure trivia, and the jake y'all.
 
2012-10-24 03:58:24 AM
Somewhere along the line, Eli Manning is going to have a HOF career, and people are going to wonder how that happened.
 
2012-10-24 05:44:32 AM

Harry_Seldon: Somewhere along the line, Eli Manning is going to have a HOF career, and people are going to wonder how that happened.


hasn't he already had one?
 
2012-10-24 06:22:05 AM

AdamK: Harry_Seldon: Somewhere along the line, Eli Manning is going to have a HOF career, and people are going to wonder how that happened.

hasn't he already had one?


Nope, not yet.

Jerry Kramer, Steve Tasker point, laugh
 
2012-10-24 07:02:22 AM
This just in, whooping up a team that plays like crap
/Ravens fan...
 
2012-10-24 07:36:13 AM

Harry_Seldon: Somewhere along the line, Eli Manning is going to have a HOF career, and people are going to wonder how that happened.


That thread will make Treygreen13's head explode.
 
2012-10-24 08:42:56 AM
Of course Eli is in the HOF.

He was the winning QB on a Superbowl winning New York team. He is a lock with one. With 2 he is a first ballot unanimous pick.

If he wins again they need to appoint him the next day, and furthermore ordain him as the best QB ever.
 
2012-10-24 08:57:49 AM

robsul82: For scoring a pathetic 33.3, for recording the lowest total for a Jake winner that I can think of, for doing the least imaginable to win, I'm not proud...DEFINITELY not proud...but I must present the Week 7 Jake for the 2012 NFL season to Mark Sanchez of the New York Jets.


Heh. Even when he wins, Sanchez brings TEH SUCKNESS.
 
2012-10-24 09:00:12 AM

mikaloyd: Had that happened, the Texans would have edged the Giants for second in the rankings. But because the Texans dominated the Ravens so thoroughly, it left no doubt that the Giants should be ranked higher than Baltimore should be ranked -- at the expense of Houston in the rankings."

And right there is where his whole explanation tips over onto its side and shatters into a thousand pieces of dried bull crap.


I like my explanation far better. It holds for any particular week. God help us if the Giants were to actually be the best team in the league during the season... they'd have to invent a new place above first.
 
2012-10-24 09:04:15 AM

AdamK: Harry_Seldon: Somewhere along the line, Eli Manning is going to have a HOF career, and people are going to wonder how that happened.

hasn't he already had one?


THat. I'm not really familiar with how picky the Football HoF is (pretty much a newcomer to the sport), but I'd guess a couple of rings and some nice QB stats would get you in there, not as the best ever, but surely in the club. Guy can play football, can play it under pressure, and has had the good luck of playing in a team where he could bag the big one. Twice. Against a sure-fire HoFer and in the conversation for GoaT (as far as I've been hearing around here) Brady. So yeah, he's in.

/even though his doofus face makes me want to punch him
 
2012-10-24 11:24:21 AM

prickly pete v2: This Looks Fun: "according to this graph, is Minnesota beating Green Bay?"

Don't need a graph to answer that with a "no"


Your incredibly clever insight aside, the question was specifically about the graph. In which case, yes, you DO need the graph to answer this question.
 
2012-10-24 11:29:56 AM

Dheiner: Of course Eli is in the HOF.

He was the winning QB on a Superbowl winning New York team. He is a lock with one. With 2 he is a first ballot unanimous pick.

If he wins again they need to appoint him the next day, and furthermore ordain him as the best QB ever.


Just like Phil Simms and Jeff Hostetler are in the HOF right?
 
2012-10-24 11:34:40 AM
Eli has 2 rings and 2 MVPs, that's all you need to know. He's a lock first ballot HoF'r.

Joe Montana is the only player to have won three Super Bowl MVP awards; four others-Starr, Terry Bradshaw, Tom Brady, and Manning-have won the award twice.
 
2012-10-24 11:39:04 AM

DoBeDoBeDo: Eli has 2 rings and 2 MVPs, that's all you need to know. He's a lock first ballot HoF'r.

Joe Montana is the only player to have won three Super Bowl MVP awards; four others-Starr, Terry Bradshaw, Tom Brady, and Manning-have won the award twice.


And not a fark was given about Super Bowl MVPs as a HoF criteria.
 
2012-10-24 11:40:26 AM

DoBeDoBeDo: Eli has 2 rings and 2 MVPs, that's all you need to know. He's a lock first ballot HoF'r.


SB MVPs. There's a huge difference between MVP and SB MVP.

/and FFS, neither Manning nor Brady should have two SB MVPs. The NE defense against StL and the NYG defense against NE the first time were far and away the most impressive performers of each day.
 
2012-10-24 11:41:35 AM
But yes, Eli will be going into the HoF - it's quasi-debatable as to whether it's deserved, but there's no doubt it's going to happen.
 
2012-10-24 11:43:14 AM

roc6783: DoBeDoBeDo: Eli has 2 rings and 2 MVPs, that's all you need to know. He's a lock first ballot HoF'r.

Joe Montana is the only player to have won three Super Bowl MVP awards; four others-Starr, Terry Bradshaw, Tom Brady, and Manning-have won the award twice.

And not a fark was given about Super Bowl MVPs as a HoF criteria.


Talk to Peter King about that, one of his main arguments against Monk was that he wasn't a big part of the team when he won 3 rings. I believe he even said that if he had even 1 SB MVP that he'd be the first to vote him in.
 
2012-10-24 11:45:19 AM

DoBeDoBeDo: Eli has 2 rings and 2 MVPs, that's all you need to know.


His first SB MVP was a travesty. If there was any justice in the world, one of the D-Linemen on the Giants would have gotten the Super Bowl MVP. I'll give him credit for the 2nd one.

But any Hall of Fame that includes Joe Namath (the most overrated QB of all time... all time) doesn't care about stats or performance.
 
2012-10-24 11:47:21 AM

DoBeDoBeDo: Talk to Peter King about that


If I'm in a position to talk to Peter King, I doubt he's going to be interested in discussing SB MVPs after I kick him in the balls.
 
2012-10-24 11:48:25 AM

DoBeDoBeDo: roc6783: DoBeDoBeDo:***snip***
Talk to Peter King about that, one of his main arguments against Monk was that he wasn't a big part of the team when he won 3 rings. I believe he even said that if he had even 1 SB MVP that he'd be the first to vote him in.


Here's 2 differences between Peter King and I:
1. He's an idiot, I am not.
2. He has a vote, I do not.

Guess which one matters more to him, and which one matters more to me.

//Should Desmond Howard be in the HoF? No, but but but he has a **gasp** Super Bowl MVP...See why it's a stupid criteria yet?
 
2012-10-24 11:50:01 AM

Dheiner: Of course Eli is in the HOF.

He was the winning QB on a Superbowl winning New York team. He is a lock with one. With 2 he is a first ballot unanimous pick.

If he wins again they need to appoint him the next day, and furthermore ordain him as the best QB ever.


Nowadays, quarterbacks all get in on the first ballot. The last guy to get in but have to wait was Bob Griese, who retired in 1980 and got inducted in 1990. The next 9 QBs who retired all got in on their first ballot (Bradshaw, Fouts, Montana, Kelly, Elway, Marino, Young, Moon, Aikman).

Also, there has been a serious drought of quarterback HoFers. Last ones in were Aikman and Moon in 2006. Steve McNair is eligible this year, but I don't see anyone getting in until Kurt Warner in 2015 and Brett Favre in 2016.

Right now I'd put Eli right in that caliber of player. Probably not GoaT-level like Montana or Marino (Favre, Brady, Payton Manning more recently), but right at the top of the class for an extended period. If he got hurt today and never played again, would 7 seasons be enough to put him in the HoF? It would be close.

There are 6 active QBs with a total of 10 Super Bowl victories and I'd say all 6 of them will be in the HoF (Brady, Eli, Payton, Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisburger). I would guess that Big Ben will not be a first ballot winner, but he will get in. Aaron Rodgers is only in his 5th season as a starter, so he needs a few more more years at the elite level to really qualify, but should do it.
 
2012-10-24 11:55:52 AM

roc6783: DoBeDoBeDo: roc6783: DoBeDoBeDo:***snip***
Talk to Peter King about that, one of his main arguments against Monk was that he wasn't a big part of the team when he won 3 rings. I believe he even said that if he had even 1 SB MVP that he'd be the first to vote him in.

Here's 2 differences between Peter King and I:
1. He's an idiot, I am not.
2. He has a vote, I do not.

Guess which one matters more to him, and which one matters more to me.

//Should Desmond Howard be in the HoF? No, but but but he has a **gasp** Super Bowl MVP...See why it's a stupid criteria yet?


I didn't say it wasn't and he isn't stupid. I simply said that because Eli has 2 SB MVPs he's a lock. We don't get to vote, guys like Peter King do and that is one of the things he looks at.
 
2012-10-24 12:04:12 PM

DoBeDoBeDo: I didn't say it wasn't and he isn't stupid. I simply said that because Eli has 2 SB MVPs he's a lock. We don't get to vote, guys like Peter King do and that is one of the things he looks at.


Eli will get in. No doubt about it. He has improved as a player and is solid now to go with his 2 SB wins.

I disagree with a lot of people being in the Hall of Fame, but at least it isn't as meaningless as the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, which is a joooooooooooooke.
 
2012-10-24 12:14:23 PM

Treygreen13: Eli will get in. No doubt about it. He has improved as a player and is solid now to go with his 2 SB wins.



Eli is in, no doubt. Two rings in that media market is a fait accompli.

I think in his 7-8 year tenure, he's been hovering around the 10th - 12th best QB in the league, but ultimately he's made plays onthe biggest stage and that is what voters will remember.
 
2012-10-24 12:18:00 PM

Treygreen13: DoBeDoBeDo: I didn't say it wasn't and he isn't stupid. I simply said that because Eli has 2 SB MVPs he's a lock. We don't get to vote, guys like Peter King do and that is one of the things he looks at.

Eli will get in. No doubt about it. He has improved as a player and is solid now to go with his 2 SB wins.

I disagree with a lot of people being in the Hall of Fame, but at least it isn't as meaningless as the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, which is a joooooooooooooke.


I know they let in Paul Simon, ok fine he's got the longevity thing so most of his stats are just garbage time, but whatever he's got numbers. But then they let that no good hanger on Garfunkel in? Seriously? The guy has a few good seasons, but isn't even the best at his position on his OWN TEAM, and he makes it? Ridiculous.
 
2012-10-24 12:36:12 PM

skrame: Give us a kiss?


What the hell is wrong with you


eddievercetti: Is Indy a pony and who's Seattle?


Seattle is Scuttle from the Little Mermaid. I need a better picture of him.


IAmRight: F*ck yeah. Has anyone else traveled more than 31 spots overall? We're going to do the equivalent of going from top to bottom back to top of the league!


The Redskins have traveled 32 spots. Nine teams have traveled 20-29 spots. Sixteen teams 10-19. Five teams 1-9. I'm not sure what that's saying, exactly. That they were quite wrong about 2 teams & fairly solid on 5?
 
2012-10-24 12:49:08 PM

Di Atribe:
The Redskins have traveled 32 spots.


Keep that number running. Everytime we win "GOM RG3 R teh Jesus!!!" Everytime we lose: "GOM this team r full of holes!!!!!"

I wouldn't be surprised with a 3 spot yo-yo after every week.
 
2012-10-24 02:53:47 PM

Di Atribe: The Redskins have traveled 32 spots.


Seattle, Washington big movers!
 
Displayed 40 of 190 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report