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
 
2012-10-23 12:41:57 PM
Hmmm both Houston and NY Giants moved up a spot from No. 3 to No. 2 and no one was No. 2 last week? Weird.

/it'll probably be fixed before anyone sees this
 
2012-10-23 12:44:58 PM
Hard to argue where anyone from 12 through 18 should go. I'd probably cautiously put the Redskins higher than the Chargers and Dolphins, but it's easy to find counterpoints as to why they shouldn't be.
 
2012-10-23 12:47:19 PM
If Atlanta makes it to the postseason, I wonder if they'll figure out how to win a playoff game.
 
2012-10-23 12:51:45 PM

Sin_City_Superhero: If Atlanta makes it to the postseason, I wonder if they'll figure out how to win a playoff game.


They're on pace to score -17 points in their first playoff game this year.
 
2012-10-23 12:55:20 PM

IAmRight: Hmmm both Houston and NY Giants moved up a spot from No. 3 to No. 2 and no one was No. 2 last week? Weird.

/it'll probably be fixed before anyone sees this


The whole "upper class" is screwy. The 2-5 teams all moved up by 1 but Baltimore only fell 2 spots? Doesn't seem to make sense.
 
2012-10-23 12:55:51 PM
I honestly think you have to put Green Bay ahead of Baltimore right now. The Packers looked dominant in beating two quality teams over the past two weeks, while the Ravens haven't looked dominant since week 1.
 
2012-10-23 12:57:34 PM
The Green Bay domination was the best thing to happen to the Texans. It showed them their weaknesses and they definitely worked on it before the Baltimore game. That was just an utter domination from the safety onward.
 
2012-10-23 12:59:03 PM
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.
 
2012-10-23 01:00:14 PM

IAmRight: Hmmm both Houston and NY Giants moved up a spot from No. 3 to No. 2 and no one was No. 2 last week? Weird.

/it'll probably be fixed before anyone sees this


In "how they voted" the Giants got three 2's and two 3's. The Texans, two 2's and three 3's. It should be Giants at #2 and Texans at #3.
 
2012-10-23 01:21:16 PM
Top 20 team!
 
2012-10-23 01:32:54 PM
Also, Baltimore should probably be around the 10 range, given all the injuries and the fact that Flacco just isn't that good and Cam Cameron continually forgets to use Ray Rice.
 
2012-10-23 01:40:41 PM
I vote we quit using ESPN for these dicussions until they stop with the lame auto-play video.
 
2012-10-23 01:41:32 PM

downstairs: I vote we quit using ESPN for these dicussions until they stop with the lame auto-play video.

 
2012-10-23 01:41:45 PM

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.



Yeah, unfortunately I'm thinking 8-8 this year.  And with the Falcons start, there's no way we're winning the division.
 
Sigh.
 
2012-10-23 01:42:22 PM

Aarontology: downstairs: I vote we quit using ESPN for these dicussions until they stop with the lame auto-play video.



Oh, which starts after I've scrolled halfway down the list.
 
2012-10-23 01:43:06 PM

IAmRight: Also, Baltimore should probably be around the 10 range, given all the injuries and the fact that Flacco just isn't that good and Cam Cameron continually forgets to use Ray Rice.


As a Ravens' fan, I can't even see them that high. They've had one good game this year (Cincinnati), the rest of their wins have been based purely on luck. That they had such a close game against Philly was lucky (or predictable, depending on your views toward Vick's skills). They should be 1-6. They should be ranked about 20th in the Power Polls. Their defense is a shell of its former self. Sure, you can try to blame injuries and free-agency losses, but that would give an excuse to poor secondary coverage and weak tackling. They'd be hard-pressed to scare a troop of Girl Scouts. Their offense is laughable. I've been a big defender of Cameron over the years. This year has stopped that cheer leading. Don't even get me started on Pees.
 
2012-10-23 01:44:24 PM

IAmRight: Baltimore should probably be around the 10 range


Who else besides Green Bay do you put ahead of them? New England, who lost H2H to Baltimore & needed overtime to knock off the Jets? Minnesota? Pittsburgh? Seattle? #7 works for Baltimore, at least until we drop a few more games.

IAmRight: Flacco just isn't that good


Flacco is a champ at home. He just forgets how to quarterback when he's too far away from Mom/Ellio's.

IAmRight: Cam Cameron continually forgets to use Ray Rice


Rice is 8th in the league in rushing (11th in carries) and only Darren Sproles has more receptions as a RB (they have the same number of targets). Ray is 2nd only to Adrian Peterson in yards from scrimmage...I don't really have a problem with the workload they're giving him, and in Sunday's case there's only so many times you're down 30+.
 
2012-10-23 01:44:39 PM

downstairs: Oh, which starts after I've scrolled halfway down the list.


I've started to avoid ESPN for the most part because of the auto-play stuff. The power rankings are about the only thing I still go there for.
 
2012-10-23 01:45:42 PM

downstairs: I vote we quit using ESPN for these dicussions until they stop with the lame auto-play video.


Adblock plus works wonders on that.
 
2012-10-23 01:48:24 PM

downstairs: I vote we quit using ESPN for these dicussions until they stop with the lame auto-play video.


Flash block
 
2012-10-23 01:48:38 PM

Harv72b: downstairs: I vote we quit using ESPN for these dicussions until they stop with the lame auto-play video.

Adblock plus works wonders on that.


Most offices don't allow you to install that. I've got it at home, but work is a no-go.

That's why I leave headphones plugged in all the time, prevents those stupid auto-play videos from blasting out to the whole office
 
2012-10-23 01:55:48 PM
So how do you come back from a dismal 6-8 performance in week 6? You nail down 10 of 13 this time around, with two of your losses coming via bone-headed plays in the final minutes of their respective games and the other just being a homer pick that you knew was probably going to be wrong, but had to make anyway. Seriously, though: Buffalo, Washington...fark you. Fark you with a whale dong in your idiotic, choking bungholes. Do you have any idea what 12-1 would feel like? No, of course you don't because you're the farking Buffalo Bills and the Washington farking Redskins. You exist solely to get the hopes of your fans up, year after agonizing year, only to send them crashing back to earth faster than an ultra-light piloted by the Honey Boo Boo family. You're like the horse that crashes out of the gate like a champion and then stops to take a shiat halfway through the race. You are the third part of the Godfather trilogy, and you should be ashamed of yourselves. Well, except for you, Robert Griffin, because you're the greatest thing to happen to football since cheerleaders.

Link to the original post if anyone's interested.

Seattle Seahawks at San Francisco 49ers:
Aside from a gross overestimation on the number of points, I pretty much nailed this. All the scheduling symmetry remains, and as a bonus I even came within 1 point of nailing the final spread. And while I realize that Alex Smith and Russell Wilson are not exactly Canton candidates at this point in their careers, 262 combined passing yards is pretty lame. 1-0


Tennessee Titans at Buffalo Bills:
So you have the ball at your own 39 yard-line, 3rd & 7, 3 minutes left in the game and a 6 point lead. You've already rushed for 166 yards in the game and you have a dude on your team who averages more than 7 yards/carry on the season. Your quarterback is Ryan Fitzpatrick. WHY THE FARK DO YOU THROW THE BALL??? Buffalo's defense had actually stopped the Titans on three consecutive drives at that point in the game, and had allowed just one score in the second half. Well, for some reason Fitzpatrick drops back, throws, gets picked off, and the rest is history Buffalo. 1-1


Dallas Cowboys at Carolina Panthers:
Surprisingly enough, a game between the two lowest-scoring teams in the conference ended with only three touchdowns being scored between both sides. The sophomore slump for Cam Newton continues, while the Cowboys continue to struggle with getting the ball into the end zone. A win is a win, but at some point Dallas will have to discover an offense if they want to contend. 2-1


Baltimore Ravens at Houston Texans:
In all honesty I expected this loss. Houston is a good, balanced team, and the Ravens are not (at least, not without Ray Lewis or Lardarius Webb on the defense). I definitely did not expect a 43-13 drubbing, though, and I doubt anyone else other than the most ardent Texans fan would have. What's really puzzling is Joe Flacco's Jekyll & Hyde act in games played at home vs. those on the road: Flacco maintains a sterling 106.6 passer rating in his four starts in Baltimore this season, but plunges to a 55.9 on the road. 2-2


Cleveland Browns at Indianapolis Colts:
So Brandon Weeden actually out-passed Andrew Luck on Sunday, throwing for more yards, a higher completion percentage, and 2 touchdowns vs. Luck's zero. The Colts' rookie did better on the ground, though, running for two scores, while Indy's defense...well, saying "kept the Browns in check" is kinda like stating "holds the grass down", but whatever. 3-2

Arizona Cardinals at Minnesota Vikings:
For once, I not only got the pick itself right but also nailed the logic behind it. Christian Ponder completed just 8 passes for 58 yards (unless you count throws completed to the Cardinals), but Adrian Peterson dominated on the ground and the Vikings' defense did the rest. 4-2


Washington Redskins at New York Giants:
How? The fark? Do you? Give up? A 77-yard touchdown pass? While nursing a 3-point lead? With 83 farking seconds left in the game???? Honorable mention goes to Santana Moss for coughing up RG3's chances to lead another "game-winning" drive in the final two minutes, but seriously...there is no way you can surrender the deep ball in that scenario, and even less way you can allow it to go for the score. Every Washington defensive back on the field for that play should dock himself a game's pay and personally apologize to me for spoiling my second consecutive epic upset pick. Or just donate those checks to me, that'll work too. 4-3


Green Bay Packers at St. Louis Rams:
I seriously doubt Aaron Rodgers throws another 6 touchdowns here (St. Louis has only allowed 4 TD passes all season), but if he can lead the Pack to 24 points it should be enough.
Rodgers discount double-checked his way to three TD passes, and the 30-20 final proved me conclusively correct on that 24-point prediction. I love it when a plan comes together. 5-3

New Orleans Saints at Tampa Bay Buccaneers:
A second straight monster game for Josh Freeman kept this one close, but as predicted Drew Brees and the Saints' passing game was just too much for Tampa Bay to handle. There were two rather surprising events in the game, however: New Orleans actually ran for a touchdown (only their third of the season), and nobody scored for the entire third quarter. 6-3

New York Jets at New England Patriots:
Okay, so the Patriots won and predictably a Mark Sanchez miscue ended the game in OT, but as a New England fan I would have to be mortified by the fact that their secondary allowed Sanchez to complete nearly 70% of his passes, while throwing for over 300 yards for the just 7th time in his 54-game career. That performance so addled the brain of commentator Jim Nantz that he thought New York had actually won the game. 7-3

Jacksonville Jaguars at Oakland Raiders:
The battle of this conference's two lowest-scoring teams offered up quite a few more points than the NFC version, but oh, the poor Jaguars. As if the offense wasn't offensive enough, Maurice Jones-Drew is out at least through next weekend & possibly quite a bit longer with a foot injury, and Chad Henne actually found a way not to create a quarterback controversy after coming in for injured starter Blaine Gabbert. All this while the Raiders somehow managed to barely beat Jacksonville. 8-3

Pittsburgh Steelers at Cincinnati Bengals:
So with injuries to their top two running backs Pittsburgh turns to Jonathan Dwyer, who managed 123 yards on 16 carries last season. And of course Dwyer rushes for 122 on 17 attempts in this one, providing a much-needed respite for Ben Roethlisberger and the Steelers' receivers. Andy Dalton had a day best forgotten, completing just 14 of 28 passes for 105 yards, while A.J. Green caught just one throw for an 8-yard touchdown. 9-3

Detroit Lions at Chicago Bears:
Just like everyone expected, Matthew Stafford and Jay Cutler combined for 1 turnover in a 13-7 Bears victory. Seriously, though, what on earth happened to the Lions' hands (paws?)? Six fumbles (3 lost) in a single game would be bad even for Philadelphia. 10-3
 
2012-10-23 02:04:06 PM

Aarontology: downstairs: Oh, which starts after I've scrolled halfway down the list.

I've started to avoid ESPN for the most part because of the auto-play stuff. The power rankings are about the only thing I still go there for.



For awhile they were also doing it on the damn "todays MLB scores" page.  Which is the last place it should be.
 
Now, if you want to have a non-auto-play video associated with an article... go nuts.
 
2012-10-23 02:19:10 PM
Buffalo has the NFL's worst run defense (176.9 yards per game) after letting Chris Johnson run wild. (Hensley) offensive strategy in the league.

Honestly, how do you not keep feeding the ball to those running backs? Just like I saw versus the Cardinals. They had been moving the ball just fine near the end of the game to win it outright, then lined up in a wild cat formation, ran it, and then the idiot heave hoed it to the end zone for an interception. This time, replace Cardinals with Titans and wild card with standard set and dumbass quarterback for ... the other one and you get a similar outcome. This time, however, nobody missed a chip shot field goal.

Is this what it feels like to be a Browns fan?
 
2012-10-23 02:32:01 PM

downstairs: 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.


Yeah, unfortunately I'm thinking 8-8 this year.  And with the Falcons start, there's no way we're winning the division.
 
Sigh.


IF the Saints won out - and that would be a twelve game winning streak, and they did that plus one more back in 2009 with a number of close calls, so it is certainly plausible - that would include two victories over the Falcons, so if they lost two more games in addition to that, the Saints would own the tie-breaker and then the division is won. I don't see that happening, though, largely because this defense and this team bear more resemblance to the 2008 team that couldn't close out enough games as opposed to the 2009 team that could. (Anyone remember "Finish Strong" from that season.) What bothered me most about the final quarter of the game on Sunday was the offense's inability to pick up that last first down that would have pretty much sealed the deal without any further drama. The offense MUST make those conversions to have any chance of winning a wild card spot because this defense can not be handed a one-score lead to protect in the closing minutes. The play calling on second and third down on the last Saints' possession drove me insane. I'm not going to put too much stock in the total yards given up statistic. The defense under Greg Williams gave up tons of yards but performed well in the red zone and managed to keep points off the board enough even when an opponent drove on them to make a difference. In this game, the Saints had two busted plays that gashed them - the 95-yard reception that Jenkins chased down and kept out of the endzone by an ass hair and the 36-yard rushing TD. And I would point out they negated that 95-yard catch with an incredible defensive stand, so yards given up don't mean a whole lot to me. South Carolina didn't give up 200 yards to Florida over the weekend and got absolutely clobbered.
 
2012-10-23 02:32:50 PM

Harv72b: #7 works for Baltimore, at least until we drop a few more games.


Based on the season so far, sure, they can be higher. Looking forward? They're boned.

/is Ngata at least okay? didn't see much of the game (RedZone) just saw him injured for a bit...
//BTW, how stoked is Detroit to go from facing the No. 1 pass defense in the league to...facing the No. 2 pass defense in the league next week? (by FO rankings, which are, admittedly, a week old...but I don't think the Seahawks are dropping too much)
 
2012-10-23 02:41:40 PM

Aarontology: downstairs: I vote we quit using ESPN for these dicussions until they stop with the lame auto-play video.


We can't change horses mid-stream. People have suggested we use different sources for our power rankings over the years & it almost always comes back to this: it's not that we think ESPN is the smartest or the coolest. They're the derpiest & therefore we have more ammo to make fun of them with.

It wouldn't be any fun if they were legitimate.

In before WHAR GRAF?

i.imgur.com
 

Link to bigger
 
2012-10-23 02:44:40 PM

Di Atribe: Aarontology: downstairs: I vote we quit using ESPN for these dicussions until they stop with the lame auto-play video.

We can't change horses mid-stream. People have suggested we use different sources for our power rankings over the years & it almost always comes back to this: it's not that we think ESPN is the smartest or the coolest. They're the derpiest & therefore we have more ammo to make fun of them with.

It wouldn't be any fun if they were legitimate.

In before WHAR GRAF?

[i.imgur.com image 850x1039] 

Link to bigger


You have Giants and Texans tied.
 
2012-10-23 02:44:45 PM
WHAR GRA...


Di Atribe: In before WHAR GRAF?


Dammit.
 
2012-10-23 02:45:15 PM
Oh. So do they. Weird. Never mind.
 
2012-10-23 02:45:30 PM

Nadie_AZ: You have Giants and Texans tied.


Probably because up until recently, so did ESPN.
 
2012-10-23 02:51:33 PM

Gecko Gingrich: Nadie_AZ: You have Giants and Texans tied.

Probably because up until recently, so did ESPN.


That doesn't really make much sense. It was better when they were tied. So the Texans were #2 on the list last week, utterly dominate Baltimore in every aspect of the game (well, minus special teams defense), and drop a spot? Meanwhile the Giants barely squeak by with a win agains the 'Skins, and they move up?
 
2012-10-23 03:07:20 PM

Nadie_AZ: Oh. So do they. Weird. Never mind.


Yeah, I just refreshed & it's fixed. Very weird. I'll change it in the "real" graph for accuracy's sake. I don't feel like uploading it to imgur again, though.
 
2012-10-23 03:16:30 PM
i291.photobucket.com 


Welcome one and all to my new quiz-show NAME THAT PLAYER. I've taken some of the choicest cuts of statistical goodness and assembled them into a Fill In The Blank questions. It's your responsibility to guess who the statistical leader (or laggard) is for these semi obscure but surprisingly relevant stats. No looking on your classmate's papers, no shouting out the answers. Please write down how many answers you got right, and then shove it up your ass because I don't care how you did.

Today's quiz is 15 questions. Three categories. QBs, RBs, and Teams. Answers at the end. No peeking!

Section 1: Name that QB.


Question 1: If you're going to do a collection of statistical comparisons, why not start by comparing the stat that actually moves the chains, sustain drives, and keeps the other QB off the field? This QB leads the NFL in 3rd Down Conversions for passes at all distances.
Hint: This guy is no rookie, but he replaced one.

Question 2: Speaking of drive-sustaining, let's we look at the guy who has killed the most drives late in games so far this season. Let's consider this the anti-clutch award. This QB leads the league in 2nd half INTs.
Hint: This guy used to wear purple.

Question 3: We can't talk anti-clutch without awarding "clutch". Much has been said about a certain NY Quarterback about his "clutch" attributes this season but surprisingly Mr. Manning has not been the most accurate passer in late & close game situations. If you need a pass completed in a late and close game, this is your guy.
Hint: His TE had a unique injury to start the season.

Question 4: We all love the DAGRON passes, but the stat sheets lie about exactly how far that ball traveled in the air. Sometimes they're 40 yard bombs that fall into the receiver's hands. Other times that 40 yard pass was a 5 yard dump off. This QB has put his receivers in position to get Yards After Catch better than anyone in the league.
Hint: He's near the bottom of the "wins" stat.

Question 5: Antonio Brown is not a QB, but this week he attempted a pass which fell incomplete. This qualifies him for a QB Rating of 39.6, representing both how absurd the QB Rating can be, and also a mark for futility. Two starting QBs managed to finish the week without eclipsing Antonio Brown's mark as a passer... and one of them actually won! This guy was the losing QB.
Hint: Drafted by the Baltimore Orioles.


Section 2: Name That RB

Question 1: Much like the "Name that QB" section, we start with the chain mover. This guy churns his legs and falls over that yellow line more than anyone else in the game. Note that this is not percentage of rushes that are first downs, but total first downs secured by rushing.
Hint: Wears a jersey with identical numbers.

Question 2: Establishing the running game is important for every team not named the Green Bay Packers. While the "3 yards and a cloud of dust" result worked for some of the grinders back in the good old days, now the mark of a great RB is his ability to break the big plays. This RB has the most rushes of 10 yards or more so far this season.
Hint: Scored a "6" on his wonderlic test.

Question 3: Sure, big plays are nice and piling up first downs is good. But if you want a couple of hard yards on 3rd and short, you gotta have that bruiser that can just fall forward instead of dancing around behind the line like Barry Sanders on bath salts. A few players have converted 100% of their 3rd and short opportunities, but this guy has converted 8 out of 8 attempts making him the most successful short yardage bruiser so far this season.
Hint: Won both the Jim Brown and Doak Walker awards in 2008.

Question 4: Let's say that you're putting together a team. You're tired of Running By Committee. You want that Emmitt Smith type RB that will give you consistent production. You want a guy that keeps hitting the exhausted defenses and doesn't slow down. You want somebody with the highest YPC after 20 carries in every game. You want this guy.
Hint: Hit opposing defenses and teammates this week.

Question 5: You didn't think all the RB awards were going to be good, did you? This week, one back in particular stood out as a model of futility. 3 yards and a cloud of dust would have been a significant upgrade for this player, who walked out of week 7 with the worst yards per carry (minimum 10 carries). You can blame the offensive line, but this guy was the worst of week 7.
Hint: It was definitely not for lack of a passing game.


Section 3: Name That Team


Question 1: Some say that a balanced attack is the most important thing to a good offense. Some teams believe the run is used to set up the pass. Some teams run just to keep the defense "honest". This team says, "Fark that, we're gonna run and we're going to cram this ball down your throat." This team leads the NFL in percentage of running plays, bucking the trend of the NFL being a "pass first league".
Hint: Also highest % of trolling plays.

Question 2: Rushing as a high percentage of your plays might be good, but actually rushing for the most yards means more points, more time of possession, and more of the pretty stats people like to gawk at. This team offers a lot to gawk at, leading the NFL in total rushing yards from scrimmage.
Hint: Two rookies.

Question 3: Drops are drive-killers. They're career-killers. They're game killers. The worst thing for a QB is to hit his receiver in the hands and have it repulsed like a woman who saw Joe Flacco with his helmet off. In a week where drops came at absolutely crucial times, we turn our attention to which team has the most drops up to this point in the season. As a team, which squad is the alligator-armiest, the stone-handsiest, the Braylon-Edwardsiest?
Hint: 1st in most statistical categories, including this less-than-positive one.

Question 4: Which fantasy RB should you start this week? How about next week? And the week after that? Simply put, this team has the worst rush defense in the league in terms of yards allowed, and is subsequently getting their face stomped in by pretty much anyone who can hold a ball and propel themselves forward.
Hint: Considering this ranking, things look UUUUGGGGLLLLYYYYY for them next week.

Question 5: I know that nobody cares about anyone's fantasy team. But if your opponent is starting his #1 RB against any squad, you probably want it to be the best rush defense in the league. And these guys are the best in terms of rushing yards allowed. There's nothing more satisfying than staring at a matchup screen and seeing some stud RB put up 2 points because your opponent doesn't look at matchups.
Hint: Not exactly the defense's fault they're losing, but cry me a river.

Answers below!

Alright, pencils down. Here are your answers.

Section 1:
1. Best % First Downs on 3rd Down - Matt Hasselbeck (54.2%)
2. 2nd Half Interceptions (season) - Andy Dalton (7)
3. Pass Completion Percentage, Late & Close Game - Tony Romo (81.8%)
4. YAC Attack (season) - Brandon Weeden (1014 Yards After Catch)
5. Lower QB Rating than Antonio Brown (39.6) - Russell Wilson (38.7)

Section 2:
1. Most running 1st Downs - Stevan Ridley (41)
2. Big Play Rushes >10 yards - Frank Gore (23)
3. Best 3rd and Short Back - Shonn Greene (100%, 8/8)
4. Yds/Carry 21+ Carries - Ahmad Bradshaw (7.2)
5. Worst y/carry Week 7 (min 10 carries) - Alex Green (20 rush, 35 yards 1.8ypc)

Section 3:
1. Highest rushing percentage - Seattle Seahawks (54.6%)
2. Rushing Yards (combined) - Washington Redskins 1,244
3. Butterfingers Team - New England Patriots (19 dropped passes)
4. Worst Rush Defense - Bills (176.9 yards/game)
5. Best Rush Defense - Chargers (71.2 yards/game)
 
2012-10-23 04:00:15 PM
WHAR GR...

Di Atribe: In before WHAR GRAF?


WELP
 
2012-10-23 04:14:06 PM
THE CHIEFS ARE TOO DAMN HIGH!
 
2012-10-23 04:23:52 PM
Friends,

We have gathered today to...not celebrate. Certainly not celebrate. "Celebrate" does not in any way capture the feeling any of us has here today.

"Commiserate."

Yes, commiserate. That's a much better word.

We have gathered here to commiserate on the horror that has befallen our beloved award on this day. A black cloud hangs over all of our heads this Tuesday afternoon, a dark shroud clouding our hearts and minds as we debate on who actually won this week, who really deserves this treasured trophy. Arguments at this very moment are ringing out from office water coolers to sports bars, from cubicles to factory floors.

Brother battling brother.

Priests punching rabbis directly in the face.

These are dark days for this nation.

Worse, our two major party presidential candidates went an entire 90 minutes last night without even mentioning this crisis. It was a shameful showing from the two men who are supposed to be America's best and brightest, a complete and total embarrassment to what makes this country great - a firm, unwavering belief that you and you alone truly know shiat about sports. Instead of a moderator getting steamrolled by both candidates, instead of blathering on about meaningless bullshiat like a nuclear Iran and tumult in Libya, why couldn't we have had Bob Schieffer ask the candidates, "Just why in the fark hasn't Jay Cutler thrown a pick yet tonight?"

4.bp.blogspot.com

One would think that President Obama, a well-known Bears fan, wouldn't have minded to field that question. One would think Obama would love to extoll the ability of his favorite team's gunslinger to win Jakes when he's not winning games. One would think the president would've grabbed that opportunity to rhapsodize in soaring rhetoric about Jay Cutler's innate ability throw touchdowns and temper tantrums in equal measure.

One would be wrong.

images.politico.com

Mitt Romney, well...he came off the assembly line in Michigan, didn't he? He wouldn't have had a problem bashing the Bears as emblematic of failed Chicago-style politics and reveling in the Lions as representative of the ongoing Detroit comeback. Cutler's been sensational at following in the footsteps of the namesake, it's true, but he's almost 30 years old. "At only 24 years of age, Matthew Stafford is truly the turnover-prone quarterback of the future, one Jake already won during last season," he could've uneasily stammered.

Instead, both candidates remained shamefully silent, twiddling their thumbs as Fark Sports burned. Much like the administration of James Buchanan, a storm was brewing, unrest was sown far and wide, and a scar formed across the soul of America. But instead of a civil war rife with bloodshed and brutality, what would be the result of this disgraceful inaction in the face of clear and present danger?

A malaise had come to the tab, ladies and gentlemen.

A malaise that was spread through the sheer number of tied candidates scoring 33.3 that we saw this week, not to mention the record number of winner's exemptions handed out - three, in fact, to Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, and by the grace of Purple Jesus, Christian Ponder. So really, who should win for Week 7?

Should it be Ol' Reliable, forever the bridesmaid and never the bride, Ryan Fitzpatrick? He can always be counted on to do just enough to get himself in the conversation, after all. Some weeks he even leads for a bit, until the next batch of games inevitably finds someone who smashes through Ryan's accomplishment. This week, he contributed his usual single interception and single fumble to the pile. Should that really stand as the marker?

Here we have John Skelton, another candidate with a pick and fumble, but one who managed to find a way to lose to a quarterback who only threw for 58 yards. Admittedly, it is highly tempting to simply throw him the trophy and call it a day. It simply boggles the mind to imagine how a quarterback can pass for a third of his body weight and still notch a victory. However, it becomes a little less glowing when you remember that said quarterback had Adrian Peterson - and Adrian Peterson on a day in which he didn't feel like fumbling the ball three or four times, natch - to constantly bail his ass out of the fire. Could that ridiculous failure be our winner?

We also have Robert Griffin III under consideration. It's true, he like so many others on Sunday threw an interception and lost a fumble - gave up two, in fact, but only lost one, and we know what counts here - but can that performance on the road be worthy of this award? He seemingly did all he could swipe that game in the swamps of New Jersey, leading his team to what seemed like a sure win and himself to a nice winner's exemption, only to see his defense forget that getting back should really be on the agenda. That can't be the winner, not at all.

And of course we've got Cam Newton back in the spotlight. The Best in the World. These days, the only thing he seems best in the world at is inspiring rage in doughy sportswriters prone to sweating problems. Mired in a sophomore slump, looking like the overrated jerk some brave, bright, incredibly handsome Farkers were courageous enough to call him last year, Newton tossed the ball away once on an massively misjudged throw into the endzone and managed to fumble it away before his day was done. However, when your most notable achievements come after the game in the press room, when the only thing anyone remembers about what you did was calling a woman "sweetheart" during your latest pity party, you don't deserve this glory. Hell no.

Joe Flacco did what no other quarterback did this week, throwing a whole two interceptions. Maybe the award is his just based on that, based on the idea that a pair of something's better than one of each. But then again, I don't know where that idea came from and somehow throwing two and not three only upsets me more. Sure, he got his unibrow handed to him by the best in the AFC, but that does represent a high level of competition. Can't complain too hard about that. In the end, hopefully Joey's mom made him the chicken nuggets in the animal shapes today, because he's not getting this trophy, no sir.

And then there's Mark Sanchez. The Sanchise. The gunslinger who went to AFC Championship Games in his first two seasons, led by a brash head coach whose love for a good snack was only met that for a long sole. Troubling times of late for Mark, however. Having his job threatened by His Holy Tebus, New York/New Jersey heathens so desperate for a winner they want to turn to a man who would blanch at the sight of Central Park after dark. This week was no better, really. 328 yards, sure, but a performance overall that was so bumbling it could only be described as surreal. Facing the Patriots, true, Brady and Belichick being stiff competition no matter how they've underperformed thus far. However. Being forced to boot a ball out of the back of the endzone? Yeah, I'd say that's surreal to say the least. And then there's his last turnover, the fumble to make it a piddling 33.3, but a fumble nonetheless that lost the game for his team. Are we really resigned to that? Is that our bottom line, our bare minimum of failure?

So it must be.

For scoring a pathetic 33.3, for...eh. It's just so hard, I don't...are you surprised by my tears, sir?

Strong men also cry. Strong men also...cry.

*cough*

Okay, I'm ready.

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.

i63.photobucket.com

Mark, do you have anything to...you know what, fark that and fark you. Goodnight.

*twinkling piano notes*

tvmedia.ign.com
 
2012-10-23 04:53:40 PM
the Cardinals regression I predicted two weeks ago (actually, after the Rams loss on thursday night so almost three) is in full bloom.

and locally, there are some upset media types at the report that we are considering (or supposedly, already did as the rumor was the cards were gonig to work him out Monday) working out Vince Young; that ESPN wanker tweeted it, it was "crawled" on ESPN, but the dreaded "sources close to the team" vehemently denied it. And, some scribes on Twitter were sarcastically demanding those spreading the rumor to put a name on it.

the next 4 are not looking favorabe:

SFO
@ GB
@ ATL
STL

I hate to say it but Operation Codename: Ocho Cuatro would not be a stretch. I think the North will be the power of the NFC, ATL lucky enough at home, and the Rams housed that ass just three weeks ago.
 
2012-10-23 04:54:50 PM
Bad week for my picks.

ESPN: 12 - 1 / 61 - 43
Home: 8 - 5 / 64 - 40
My Picks: 7 -6 / 57 - 47

This weeks picks:
thegreiners.org
 
2012-10-23 04:55:09 PM
i.imgur.com
Until they win next week
 
2012-10-23 04:56:40 PM

robsul82: Friends,


robsul82 - You pulled the gold out of that turd mountain, but to the futility infutile QBs this week I say:

zipmeme.com


On a side note, WHAR OTHER GRAPHS WHAR!!!!
 
2012-10-23 05:00:45 PM

robsul82: Instead, both candidates remained shamefully silent, twiddling their thumbs as Fark Sports burned


Bwaaaaaaaahahaha! An early Jake! YES it's just like Christmas!

Also, graph 2 4 u

i.imgur.com


bing bong bigger
 
2012-10-23 05:02:28 PM
Packers are better than Chicago and Baltimore.
 
2012-10-23 05:04:47 PM

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?"
 
2012-10-23 05:05:41 PM

IAmRight: Hmmm both Houston and NY Giants moved up a spot from No. 3 to No. 2 and no one was No. 2 last week? Weird.

/it'll probably be fixed before anyone sees this


No, I saw that too and scratched my head...
 
2012-10-23 05:06:11 PM

Di Atribe: robsul82: Instead, both candidates remained shamefully silent, twiddling their thumbs as Fark Sports burned

Bwaaaaaaaahahaha! An early Jake! YES it's just like Christmas!

Also, graph 2 4 u

[i.imgur.com image 850x588]

bing bong bigger


What is the STL logo?
 
2012-10-23 05:06:15 PM
This thread started off too well. We'll never make it to 150 posts without "WHAR GRAF" and "WHAR JAKE"

I like the trivia portion, though. I only managed to get Hasselbeck, except Locker was a rookie last year.

Also, worst 5-2 team is exactly correct.
 
2012-10-23 05:06:42 PM

robbiex0r: Packers are better than Chicago and Baltimore.


the good news is baltimore is a sinking ship and will be lucky to remain in the top half of the poll for much longer, and gb gets another shot at chicago, which should they win leap you over da bears.
 
2012-10-23 05:07:18 PM

robsul82: Friends, ...


You made the best of a bad week, and for that I salute you. Let's just hope we never have to put up with... this... again.

Di Atribe: Also, graph 2 4 u

[i.imgur.com image 850x588]


Oh good, the second lowest SOV in the league. 3-13 is definitely not out of the question.
 
2012-10-23 05:07:32 PM

roc6783: Di Atribe: robsul82: Instead, both candidates remained shamefully silent, twiddling their thumbs as Fark Sports burned

Bwaaaaaaaahahaha! An early Jake! YES it's just like Christmas!

Also, graph 2 4 u

[i.imgur.com image 850x588]

bing bong bigger

What is the STL logo?


And why do KC and CAR share a logo?

Or maybe if you lose to Cowboys you lose your logo.
 
2012-10-23 05:08:16 PM

VvonderJesus: This thread started off too well. We'll never make it to 150 posts without "WHAR GRAF" and "WHAR JAKE"

I like the trivia portion, though. I only managed to get Hasselbeck, except Locker was a rookie last year.

Also, worst 5-2 team is exactly correct.


Ha, you're right. My bad on that one.
 
2012-10-23 05:08:16 PM

Harv72b: Washington Redskins at New York Giants:
How? The fark? Do you? Give up? A 77-yard touchdown pass? While nursing a 3-point lead? With 83 farking seconds left in the game???? Honorable mention goes to Santana Moss for coughing up RG3's chances to lead another "game-winning" drive in the final two minutes, but seriously...there is no way you can surrender the deep ball in that scenario, and even less way you can allow it to go for the score. Every Washington defensive back on the field for that play should dock himself a game's pay and personally apologize to me for spoiling my second consecutive epic upset pick. Or just donate those checks to me, that'll work too. 4-3


The quickness with which they allowed the Giants is they only reason they had a chance to win at the end. With 1:32 on the clock and 3 timeouts left, there was no chance Eli wasn't going to drive down and at least tie the game.
 
2012-10-23 05:08:25 PM

Di Atribe: In before WHAR GRAF?


The Chargers and the Cowboys seem to be performing an elaborate dance.


Nabb1: The offense MUST make those conversions to have any chance of winning a wild card spot because this defense can not be handed a one-score lead to protect in the closing minutes. The play calling on second and third down on the last Saints' possession drove me insane.


Reminded me uncomfortably of the Chefs game. Offense hung the D out to dry in that game as well. Got far too conservative at the end this week, running essentially for the sake of running while ignoring the fact that TB's defense is much stronger against the run. It doesn't help that Grubbs seems to be comparable to Nicks in pass protection but has nowhere near the run blocking ability.

Also doesn't help that, if he weren't still just a rookie, I'd say that Corey White appears to be a worse CB than Jason David. :\
 
2012-10-23 05:08:52 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?"


It is a visual way to represent the idea that a team is unbeaten, but they "haven't beaten anyone".

So ATL may have more victories, but GB has beaten "better" opponents.

//Pulling that out of my ass, so if it is wrong, please correct me
 
2012-10-23 05:09:24 PM

VvonderJesus: Also, worst 5-2 team is exactly correct.


I've actually been noticing all season that Minnesota's been consistently ranked the lowest team with [number of Minnesota's wins] wins. I hope that means we're underrated to a super bowl win.

/It probably just means we're the worst team in whatever group we're put in.
 
2012-10-23 05:09:32 PM

VvonderJesus: This thread started off too well. We'll never make it to 150 posts without "WHAR GRAF" and "WHAR JAKE"

I like the trivia portion, though. I only managed to get Hasselbeck, except Locker was a rookie last year.

Also, worst 5-2 team is exactly correct.


Maybe cuz the thread only got greenlit around 2 PM PST. Get it at 10 AM PST and you'll get more clicks and comments.
 
2012-10-23 05:09:36 PM

ddam: And why do KC and CAR share a logo?

Or maybe if you lose to Cowboys you lose your logo.


i think its just because they have the same pct on the graph, so they're technically just on top of each other
 
2012-10-23 05:10:09 PM
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?
 
2012-10-23 05:11:34 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?"



Yeah, me too.  Just use an example... what is this supposed to tell me about ATL, GB, and TB (since they're at various extremes.)
 
I think I understand your *calulation*... but I just don't know what it means.
 
2012-10-23 05:11:37 PM

VvonderJesus: This thread started off too well. We'll never make it to 150 posts without "WHAR GRAF" and "WHAR JAKE"

I like the trivia portion, though. I only managed to get Hasselbeck, except Locker was a rookie last year.

Also, worst 5-2 team is exactly correct.


I agree, but isn't that the stuff that's considered in these rankings?
 
2012-10-23 05:12:25 PM

tlchwi02: ddam: And why do KC and CAR share a logo?

Or maybe if you lose to Cowboys you lose your logo.

i think its just because they have the same pct on the graph, so they're technically just on top of each other


wait so the logos are touching?

ewwww

/doesnt that technically count as collusion?
 
2012-10-23 05:13:02 PM

farbekrieg: robbiex0r: Packers are better than Chicago and Baltimore.

the good news is baltimore is a sinking ship and will be lucky to remain in the top half of the poll for much longer, and gb gets another shot at chicago, which should they win leap you over da bears.


meant to quote this, not Vvonder
 
2012-10-23 05:13:05 PM
robsul82, it was just a Sanchez type of week for the Jake.
 
2012-10-23 05:13:23 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?


To paraphrase from last week's thread, no matter what criteria you use, it is wrong, because it is not the same criteria that was used for these rankings. The only criteria that matters is the one used in the article that is posted to Fark, and to suggest otherwise is the height of stupidity and a failure of logic.
 
2012-10-23 05:13:52 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?


Makes sense
 
2012-10-23 05:14:24 PM

robbiex0r: VvonderJesus: This thread started off too well. We'll never make it to 150 posts without "WHAR GRAF" and "WHAR JAKE"

I like the trivia portion, though. I only managed to get Hasselbeck, except Locker was a rookie last year.

Also, worst 5-2 team is exactly correct.

I agree, but isn't that the stuff that's considered in these rankings?


To paraphrase from last week's thread, no matter what criteria you use, it is wrong, because it is not the same criteria that was used for these rankings. The only criteria that matters is the one used in the article that is posted to Fark, and to suggest otherwise is the height of stupidity and a failure of logic.
 
2012-10-23 05:15:07 PM

robbiex0r:
I agree, but isn't that the stuff that's considered in these rankings?


so all the sudden you expect espn to use logic and reason?

really if they could get away with it they would have ranked MOAR TEBOW 3rd if they could have gotten away with it.
 
2012-10-23 05:15:23 PM
Deja deja deja deja deja deja vu
 
2012-10-23 05:15:31 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?


Speaking on behalf of the Giants and their fans, the Texans can have the farking #2 spot in the Power Rankings released on Oct 23 if it means so damn much to them.
 
2012-10-23 05:15:31 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?


And Sports Center turned into a loop of "CLUTCHY MCCLUTCHERSON" Eli "BEST QB ON THE PLANET" Manning in spite of it being a 2 INT, 1 TD game for him.

That whole game got blown waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of proportion by the media. Just a huge collision of two QBs they've been super-hyping since week 1. So no surprise it jumped the Giants up the chart.
 
2012-10-23 05:15:40 PM
Yay graf!

Bravo, Robsul82, for the magnificent Jake.

And keep up the trivia, TreyGreen, that was fun.
 
2012-10-23 05:15:40 PM
Interesting? Doubtful: There are as many AFC teams in the top 10 as NFC North.
 
2012-10-23 05:17:05 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?"


It answers the question, "But who have they beaten?" Green Bay & New England have the same record, but Green Bay has beaten better teams. So it's plausible to say that GB has had a harder time getting to 4-3 than NE.

As the season goes on, it'll spread out like a Christmas tree. The really good team is the star on top & the worst team is on the lowest, left branch (usually Cleveland).
 
2012-10-23 05:17:55 PM

Bunny Deville: Yay graf!

Bravo, Robsul82, for the magnificent Jake.

And keep up the trivia, TreyGreen, that was fun.


Thanks. I'll try to keep it going. May not be 15 questions every week but I'll try to keep it going.
 
2012-10-23 05:18:11 PM

Di Atribe: As the season goes on, it'll spread out like my mom last night.

 
2012-10-23 05:18:26 PM

Bunny Deville: Yay graf!

Bravo, Robsul82, for the magnificent Jake.

And keep up the trivia, TreyGreen, that was fun.


Yeah, I liked the trivia as well. Didn't do very good on it myself.
 
2012-10-23 05:18:32 PM

roc6783: 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?

To paraphrase from last week's thread, no matter what criteria you use, it is wrong, because it is not the same criteria that was used for these rankings. The only criteria that matters is the one used in the article that is posted to Fark, and to suggest otherwise is the height of stupidity and a failure of logic.


The fact that the NFC's a stronger conference than the AFC doesn't hurt either.
 
2012-10-23 05:20:36 PM

Di Atribe: 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?"

It answers the question, "But who have they beaten?" Green Bay & New England have the same record, but Green Bay has beaten better teams. So it's plausible to say that GB has had a harder time getting to 4-3 than NE.

As the season goes on, it'll spread out like a Christmas tree. The really good team is the star on top & the worst team is on the lowest, left branch (usually Cleveland).


Now I'll apply my knowledge:

2 teams tied vertically have the same SOS, and the one higher up has won more of those games.

2 teams tied horizontally have won the same number of games and the one to the right has the tougher schedule.

And so to compare MN/GB, Minnesota has won more/easier games while GB has won fewer/tougher games.
 
2012-10-23 05:21:12 PM

downstairs: Yeah, me too. Just use an example... what is this supposed to tell me about ATL, GB, and TB (since they're at various extremes.)


The Falcons' win percentage is 1.000, being 6-0 and all, and their opponents' combined record is roughly .350 (Which, of course, includes the 6 losses from having played the Falcons.)

GB's win percentage, at 4-3, is just under .600, and their opponents' combined record is just over .600. They have "stronger" wins compared to Atlanta, as two of their opponents, Chicago and Houston, are otherwise unbeaten.
 
2012-10-23 05:24:43 PM

roc6783: What is the STL logo?


Lambchop. :)

i.imgur.com


ddam: And why do KC and CAR share a logo?


CAR is "underneath" KC (probably due to CAR being alphabetically before KC, so it gets to the spot first & then KC gets there and sits on top of the other logo). Some of the logos have a bit of transparency to them, which is cool, but also an accident, so I'm not sure how to duplicate the effect.


Misplaced yat: The Chargers and the Cowboys seem to be performing an elaborate dance.


Yeah. I've been noticing a lot of similarities beyond devastatingly handsome quarterbacks.


Also, many thanks to RminusQ for doing the actual math for that SOV chart. He's a smart mofo, I just put it on a pretty graph so our brains don't melt from staring at numbers.
 
2012-10-23 05:25:07 PM

Rwa2play: The fact that the NFC's a stronger conference than the AFC doesn't hurt either.


And a home win over the Ravens doesn't carry as much weight since they don't have their best cornerback or Ray Lewis anymore.
 
2012-10-23 05:26:12 PM
Obviously The Jake and the graphs were stellar per usual, but I really dug the trivia this week too. You're all amazing.
 
2012-10-23 05:26:33 PM

This Looks Fun: Now I'll apply my knowledge:

2 teams tied vertically have the same SOS, and the one higher up has won more of those games.

2 teams tied horizontally have won the same number of games and the one to the right has the tougher schedule.

And so to compare MN/GB, Minnesota has won more/easier games while GB has won fewer/tougher games.


Yes. Nailed it.
 
2012-10-23 05:27:19 PM

This Looks Fun: Di Atribe: This Looks Fun: Di Atribe: ***snip**

Now I'll apply my knowledge:

2 teams tied vertically have the same SOSV, and the one higher up has won more of those games.

2 teams tied horizontally have won the same number of games and the one to the right has the tougher schedule.

And so to compare MN/GB, Minnesota has won more/easier games while GB has won fewer/tougher games.


FTFY, otherwise correct. GB has had to beat the best teams for their wins, while TB has feasted on the weaklings. ATL is middling, but unbeaten.
 
2012-10-23 05:28:08 PM

rickythepenguin: Di Atribe: As the season goes on, it'll spread out like my mom last night.


It's a trap game
 
2012-10-23 05:28:31 PM
Also, I think the trivia is an awesome thingamabob. MOAR thanks, treygreen13!
 
2012-10-23 05:28:45 PM

Yanks_RSJ: And a home win over the Ravens doesn't carry as much weight since they don't have their best cornerback or Ray Lewis anymore.



they appear to be this year's "team that got out to a 5-1 start then missed the playoffs"....as narrowly as they escaped the chiefs (9-6) then barely beat a bad Cowboy team, then got ragdolled by Houston.....i don't know. their shcedule on paper isn't fearsome but they're down players and Flacco, can anyone trust him?
 
2012-10-23 05:30:21 PM

roc6783: It's a trap game



ZEN
nam myo renji kyo
nam myo renji kyo
waht is the sound of one hand clapping?
nam myo renji kyo THERE ARE NO TRAP GAMES IN THENFLDAMMITALLTOHELLIWASDOINGSOGOODDAMMIT YOU GUYSTHIS IS BULLshiat I HATE YOU
 
2012-10-23 05:30:42 PM

Yanks_RSJ: Rwa2play: The fact that the NFC's a stronger conference than the AFC doesn't hurt either.

And a home win over the Ravens doesn't carry as much weight since they don't have their best cornerback or Ray Lewis anymore.


on the plus side it probably made joe flacco shut up about being an elite qb. 

/bert is pretty elite tho
 
2012-10-23 05:30:51 PM
I'd like to thank Cutler for coming back to play the second half and the Cutler/Marshall combo for doing just enough that I won my fantasy matchup due to Harbaugh's declined safety.
 
2012-10-23 05:31:56 PM
Thanks for the graphs, trivia, and as always the jake.

Go Pack Go. Not a hard game coming up, but there is always pressure for a mandatory win.
 
2012-10-23 05:32:43 PM

rickythepenguin: they appear to be this year's "team that got out to a 5-1 start then missed the playoffs"....as narrowly as they escaped the chiefs (9-6) then barely beat a bad Cowboy team, then got ragdolled by Houston.....i don't know. their shcedule on paper isn't fearsome but they're down players and Flacco, can anyone trust him?


Well I certainly wouldn't. They're certainly a good enough team, but their margin for error was fairly slim even before their defense took a couple of injury hits. That said, with a week off and then games against Cleveland and Oakland they'll probably be 7-2 before the Steelers game.
 
2012-10-23 05:33:58 PM

Di Atribe: roc6783: What is the STL logo?

Lambchop. :)

***snip***


Wicked awesome.

Not sure if anyone that has 'shop skillz would be willing to extract Rodgers from the pic below and give it to Di for the GB logo on the graph, but I would appreciate it.

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-10-23 05:34:13 PM

roc6783: Di Atribe: robsul82: Instead, both candidates remained shamefully silent, twiddling their thumbs as Fark Sports burned

Bwaaaaaaaahahaha! An early Jake! YES it's just like Christmas!

Also, graph 2 4 u

[i.imgur.com image 850x588]

bing bong bigger

What is the STL logo?


Looks like STL, CLE, and DET are all some sort of plush animals.

Teddy bears and the such. Maybe a cat
 
2012-10-23 05:35:00 PM

robbiex0r: Packers are better than Chicago and Baltimore.


Despite winning head-to-head, that violates the 2-loss difference rule.

All 0-loss teams must be ranked above all 2-loss teams
All 1-loss teams must be ranked above all 3-loss teams
All 2-loss teams must be ranked above all 4-loss teams
And so on...

The rule has been true every week since Week 15 in 2010 when Dallas (4-9) was ranked higher than Seattle (6-7).
 
2012-10-23 05:35:30 PM

GQueue: I'd like to thank Cutler for coming back to play the second half



That hit was monstrous but i can see him getting fined, for that stupid "cradle" rule the NFL selectively invokes where the defensive player is supposed to make an effort to "cradle" the QB to the ground.

that, the hit on Flacco (holy lord that cat got ROCKED) and I think Dockett on Ponder were the best hits o fhte week. that i saw at least. Ponder got cleanly hit juuuuuuust after releasing the ball, and hit got knocked literally on his ass, about 5 feet backwards. that had to hurt. he didn't roll the hit onto his back, he landed flat on his ass. looked painful.

Skelton also got rocked. he got hi-lo'd on a very, very dumb play (i forget if a naked boot or a busted play) but on a 4th and I think 2, he ran wide right, got ran down, and then got helicoptered.
 
2012-10-23 05:35:35 PM

rickythepenguin: roc6783: It's a trap game


ZEN
nam myo renji kyo
nam myo renji kyo
waht is the sound of one hand clapping?
nam myo renji kyo THERE ARE NO TRAP GAMES IN THENFLDAMMITALLTOHELLIWASDOINGSOGOODDAMMIT YOU GUYSTHIS IS BULLshiat I HATE YOU


I was hoping I would get that from the headline alone. The shiat ya'll make me do around here.
 
2012-10-23 05:37:26 PM
The Vikings are frauds waiting to be exposed.

And I'm a Vikings fan. Ponder will lose us games until he learns not to. Shamefully bad decision at the end of the first half this week. I hope he learns from it. He's got a bit of the Favre in him, need that to get beat out.
 
2012-10-23 05:39:04 PM

paswa17: robbiex0r: Packers are better than Chicago and Baltimore.

Despite winning head-to-head, that violates the 2-loss difference rule.

All 0-loss teams must be ranked above all 2-loss teams
All 1-loss teams must be ranked above all 3-loss teams
All 2-loss teams must be ranked above all 4-loss teams
And so on...

The rule has been true every week since Week 15 in 2010 when Dallas (4-9) was ranked higher than Seattle (6-7).


Its safe to say they're better than them and just wait for the rankings to adjust. The Bears might be good but their schedule has been fairly laughable aside from Dallas. Which happened to be the night when Romo and his receivers were playing hot potato.

Once the Bears hit week 10 it looks like murderer's row.
 
2012-10-23 05:39:20 PM

Earthen: The Vikings are frauds waiting to be exposed.



the north is gonna be a hoot this year. someone in that division is gonna win 11 and GET NOTHING AND LIKE IT!
 
2012-10-23 05:39:45 PM

rickythepenguin: then barely beat a bad Cowboy team


WHATCHOOSAY!?


Broktun: Looks like STL, CLE, and DET are all some sort of plush animals.

Teddy bears and the such. Maybe a cat


STL has been covered. CLE is a bulldog puppy. DET is a blue Hello Kitty. And IND is a My Little Pony (original series). Oh and SEA is Scuttle from The Little Mermaid.
 
2012-10-23 05:40:20 PM

Di Atribe: rickythepenguin: then barely beat a bad Cowboy team

WHATCHOOSAY!?


Broktun: Looks like STL, CLE, and DET are all some sort of plush animals.

Teddy bears and the such. Maybe a cat

STL has been covered. CLE is a bulldog puppy. DET is a blue Hello Kitty. And IND is a My Little Pony (original series). Oh and SEA is Scuttle from The Little Mermaid.


And the Giants are Manningface!
 
2012-10-23 05:41:24 PM

Treygreen13: And the Giants are Manningface!


YES! The first to get a lol-go!
 
2012-10-23 05:43:02 PM
The Lions suck.

But the QUALITY of suck is completely different than the way they used to suck. Now they have some very good players, playing very good football. But, as a team, they can't get it together.

Major improvement (if you look at the last decade or so of Lions play).
 
2012-10-23 05:45:23 PM

JohnAnnArbor: The Lions suck.

But the QUALITY of suck is completely different than the way they used to suck. Now they have some very good players, playing very good football. But, as a team, they can't get it together.

Major improvement (if you look at the last decade or so of Lions play).


The defense last night was awesome. Made even more impressive by the fact that they had absolutely zero help from their offense and special teams.
 
2012-10-23 05:46:06 PM

Di Atribe: WHATCHOOSAY!?



eHHH....OK.......i guess "bad" may be an overstatement but they certainly aren't good. i think we're in the same boat, love. 8-9 wins and the highly coveted "drafting #13 overall" position.
 
2012-10-23 05:47:48 PM
At some point, the Lions will show up and play more than 1 quarter. Some day, and then they may actually be worth a shiat again. That is, of course, providing they don't just try to ride Megatron the way they did Barry Sanders.

/relurk
 
2012-10-23 05:49:47 PM

Zafler: At some point, the Lions will show up and play more than 1 quarter. Some day, and then they may actually be worth a shiat again. That is, of course, providing they don't just try to ride Megatron the way they did Barry Sanders.

/relurk


im still waiting for someone to tap stafford on the shoulder and have him break into a million peices...

/not that he has done much this year while healthy
 
2012-10-23 05:50:42 PM

rickythepenguin: eHHH....OK.......i guess "bad" may be an overstatement but they certainly aren't good. i think we're in the same boat, love. 8-9 wins and the highly coveted "drafting #13 overall" position.


Hm. Well I think maybe a team should actually have a losing record to be considered "bad." I mean, how many teams would you say were good? I might come up with 3 or 4. But if you call every team at 0.500 or worse bad, you're talking about 21 teams. There's math involved, but I think that's more than half. I just think maybe we should be equally stingy with those two labels.
 
2012-10-23 05:54:31 PM

thecpt: The Bears might be good but their schedule has been fairly laughable aside from Dallas. Which happened to be the night when Romo and his receivers were playing hot potato.

Once the Bears hit week 10 it looks like murderer's row.


I agree - they have only played one team with a winning record so far and lost that game (GB). Their last 8 games have 7 teams with winning records (HOU, SF, MINx2, SEA, GB, ARI) and DET again. I'm hoping they can get to 8-1 before that stretch and essentially clinch a playoff spot.
 
2012-10-23 05:56:29 PM
Not sure if anyone saw this one, but Norv responded to the cheating allegations:

San Diego Chargers Coach Norv Turner denied Monday that any members of the team had used a sticky substance and said that the NFL is looking into the Chargers' use of a towel, not a substance.

"Nobody from the San Diego Chargers used Stickum in the game on Monday night against the Denver Broncos," Turner said Monday. "Nobody in this organization has used Stickum in any game. The questions that have been asked by the league involve a towel that has been used by this organization for over 10 years.


Link

I can't believe he's blaming it on such a loyal towel.
 
2012-10-23 05:58:55 PM

davidphogan: Not sure if anyone saw this one, but Norv responded to the cheating allegations:

San Diego Chargers Coach Norv Turner denied Monday that any members of the team had used a sticky substance and said that the NFL is looking into the Chargers' use of a towel, not a substance.

"Nobody from the San Diego Chargers used Stickum in the game on Monday night against the Denver Broncos," Turner said Monday. "Nobody in this organization has used Stickum in any game. The questions that have been asked by the league involve a towel that has been used by this organization for over 10 years.

Link

I can't believe he's blaming it on such a loyal towel.


the allegations if true, will prove it to be one

www.thetoque.com


terrible towel.


/YEAAAAAAAHHH!!
 
2012-10-23 06:01:16 PM

GQueue: I'd like to thank Cutler for coming back to play the second half and the Cutler/Marshall combo for doing just enough that I won my fantasy matchup due to Harbaugh's declined safety.


I started the night down by 12, I had Marshall and my opponent had Forte (and had Chris Johnson, damn his eyes). I ended up losing the week by 4 damn points. All I needed were two more Marshall carries and two less Forte carries and I could have made it...
 
2012-10-23 06:03:18 PM

JosephFinn: GQueue: I'd like to thank Cutler for coming back to play the second half and the Cutler/Marshall combo for doing just enough that I won my fantasy matchup due to Harbaugh's declined safety.

I started the night down by 12, I had Marshall and my opponent had Forte (and had Chris Johnson, damn his eyes). I ended up losing the week by 4 damn points. All I needed were two more Marshall carries and two less Forte carries and I could have made it...


I lost by 9 points thanks to these wonderful players:

Larry Fitzgerald: 2 points
Dez Bryant: 1 point
Maurice Jones-Drew: 0 points
 
2012-10-23 06:07:07 PM
Steelers/Redskins on Sunday. Neither team has a defense. Bet the over.

Also if RG3 gets 32 yards rushing, him and Morris will become the first rookies team mates in NFL history to both hit the 500 yards on the ground.
 
2012-10-23 06:08:26 PM
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.
 
2012-10-23 06:10:42 PM
Useless facts:

Change from Week 1 to this week :
One 15 point drop: Chiefs
One 21 point jump: Vikings

Two teams ARE WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE (back at their Week 1 rankings): 49ers, Ravens

Number of times rankings have changed:
15 teams have changed every week
8 teams have changed all but once
1 team has only moved twice (Browns)

Difference between high rank & low rank:
Lowest fluctuation: Browns with 2
Highest fluctuation: Vikings with 22
Average fluctuation: 9.063

Overall fluctuation travel:
Smallest: Browns with 3
Highest: Seahawks with 39 and still no one gives them credit for anything :(

Teams hitting their highest rank this week: Giants, Bears, & Dolphins

Teams hitting their lowest rank this week: Chargers, Bengals, Panthers, & Buccaneers

Seven teams did not change rank: Eagles, Falcons, Lions, Broncos Chiefs, Jaguars, & Browns

Five teams have held the #1 spot 

And graphs rule. And so does football. And the Sports Tab. YEAH
 
2012-10-23 06:12:42 PM
Damn you Jets. I would have been perfect in selecting games, but you just had to lose to the Patriots didn't you? I figured "hey, the Jets are due. They normally get that one upset vs. the Pats a year. This is the best time for it to happen" and they flubbed it.
 
mjg
2012-10-23 06:13:40 PM
I'm happy with my Vikings performance this year.

Cuz i had
www.oilogosphere.com
 
2012-10-23 06:30:26 PM
Thanks, loved the thread. I had a very Gore-y performance on the trivia questions.
 
2012-10-23 06:32:33 PM

Di Atribe: rickythepenguin:***snip***
Hm. Well I think maybe a team should actually have a losing record to be considered "bad." I mean, how many teams would you say were good? I might come up with 3 or 4. But if you call every team at 0.500 or worse bad, you're talking about 21 teams. There's math involved, but I think that's more than half. I just think maybe we should be equally stingy with those two labels.


When the Trollhawks get into the playoffs at 7-9 and the the Giants beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl twice, deciding who is really good and who is really bad is tough. I don't think the Cowboys or Lions are bad, but they are not playing as well as their talent would suggest, conversely, I am assuming the Vikes will fall flat on their faces soon.


mjg: I'm happy with my Vikings performance this year.

Cuz i had
[www.oilogosphere.com image 400x300]


As a Packers fan, my expectations of the Vikings can never be lowered. i always assume they will be the worst team in football, and they do their best to live up (down?) to those expectations.
 
2012-10-23 06:44:39 PM
On treys trivia I sucked worst of all FARK guessers I think. I only got Andy Dalton Frank Gore Sea Trolls and Cheatriots right.
 
2012-10-23 06:46:52 PM
www.nakoma1.com
"There's no defense in the league right now that makes life more consistently miserable for its opponents."

Strictly Representin, Bear up to 5.
 
2012-10-23 06:47:53 PM

davidphogan: "Nobody from the San Diego Chargers used Stickum in the game on Monday night against the Denver Broncos," Turner said Monday. "Nobody in this organization has used Stickum in any game. The questions that have been asked by the league involve a towel that has been used by this organization for over 10 years.


That towel had a pre-existing stickum condition from 10 years back?
 
2012-10-23 06:55:13 PM
No Palmer mention in the Jake?
 
2012-10-23 06:59:34 PM

hammer85: No Palmer mention in the Jake?


He won, he got mentioned but not by name.
 
2012-10-23 07:04:55 PM

Di Atribe: I mean, how many teams would you say were good? I might come up with 3 or 4. But if you call every team at 0.500 or worse bad, you're talking about 21 teams.


no, it isn't strictly record based. it is the eyeball test.

Treygreen13: Larry Fitzgerald: 2 points


it is no secret he (like many players) has aspirations of Canton. Unfortunately, the combination of a bad QB sitch, a dreadful O-Line sitch, and constantly being doubled is going to hurt his numbers, spesh in a FF era where so many voters will be fixated on the raw data: how many catches, how many TDs. the test oft cited for HOF in any sport is, "how well did he match up to his contemporaries?"

I guess the thing I'll say in Fitzy's defense is, how many other WRs consistently, on damn near every route, get doubled? by way of a poor comparison, remember the season Bonds' HR numbers declined because he got so many INT BBs? that's arguably what is happening to Fitzy. And it is a shame.

just a shame we don't have a competent #2 (cough cough, Anquan Boldin, all is forgiven) to help strecth the field, as the cliche goes.
 
2012-10-23 07:10:48 PM

mikaloyd: davidphogan: "Nobody from the San Diego Chargers used Stickum in the game on Monday night against the Denver Broncos," Turner said Monday. "Nobody in this organization has used Stickum in any game. The questions that have been asked by the league involve a towel that has been used by this organization for over 10 years.

That towel had a pre-existing stickum condition from 10 years back?


On the plus side Goodell would probably suspend Norv for a year, AJ for half a year, and take away a fourth round pick for that. As a Chargers, fan, other than the draft pick those probably would be good moves.
 
2012-10-23 07:21:56 PM

roc6783: I am assuming the Vikes will fall flat on their faces soon.


Even us Vikings fans are. If I look at the remaining schedule, I'm expecting no more than 4 more wins this season. Bucs and Lions at home, 1 of the 4 Bears/Packers games, and 1 of the 3 Seahawks, Rams, Texans away games.

I really don't see any more than those 4. 5 if we split evenly with the Bears and Packers, which I don't anticipate. Anything more than that would be grossly over-performing. And totally fine.
 
2012-10-23 07:25:24 PM

JosephFinn: GQueue: I'd like to thank Cutler for coming back to play the second half and the Cutler/Marshall combo for doing just enough that I won my fantasy matchup due to Harbaugh's declined safety.

I started the night down by 12, I had Marshall and my opponent had Forte (and had Chris Johnson, damn his eyes). I ended up losing the week by 4 damn points. All I needed were two more Marshall carries and two less Forte carries and I could have made it...


I had Stafford and Megatron vs. Hanson and CHI defense and I was down 7 going in. Based on our league's scoring, the two plays where Tillman broke up the Stafford-Johnson TD pass and then recovered a fumble on the next play ended up being a 19.5 pt. swing the wrong way. If Tillman doesn't break that pass up, I win. As it turned out, I lost by 10.
 
2012-10-23 07:29:02 PM

seumasokelly: JosephFinn: GQueue: I'd like to thank Cutler for coming back to play the second half and the Cutler/Marshall combo for doing just enough that I won my fantasy matchup due to Harbaugh's declined safety.

I started the night down by 12, I had Marshall and my opponent had Forte (and had Chris Johnson, damn his eyes). I ended up losing the week by 4 damn points. All I needed were two more Marshall carries and two less Forte carries and I could have made it...

I had Stafford and Megatron vs. Hanson and CHI defense and I was down 7 going in. Based on our league's scoring, the two plays where Tillman broke up the Stafford-Johnson TD pass and then recovered a fumble on the next play ended up being a 19.5 pt. swing the wrong way. If Tillman doesn't break that pass up, I win. As it turned out, I lost by 10.


Sorry, Tillman didn't recover the fumble, but CHI D did which meant 2 points against me. After having 12.5 snatched from me by the pass defense.
 
2012-10-23 07:35:48 PM

rickythepenguin: it is no secret he (like many players) has aspirations of Canton. Unfortunately, the combination of a bad QB sitch, a dreadful O-Line sitch, and constantly being doubled is going to hurt his numbers, spesh in a FF era where so many voters will be fixated on the raw data: how many catches, how many TDs. the test oft cited for HOF in any sport is, "how well did he match up to his contemporaries?"


Fitzgerald is the second-fastest WR to accumulate 10,000 yards.
 
2012-10-23 07:36:44 PM
Pittsburgh is ranked too high. They are having a crappy season and it's going to get worse before it gets better. That defense is the worst I've seen since the mid 80's...

/They beat the Bengals...That's a gimmie most of the time.
 
2012-10-23 07:47:56 PM

robsul82: Friends...


You need the drink more than I do, bro. :-(

i1182.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-23 08:01:00 PM

roc6783: Di Atribe: roc6783: What is the STL logo?

Lambchop. :)

***snip***

Wicked awesome.

Not sure if anyone that has 'shop skillz would be willing to extract Rodgers from the pic below and give it to Di for the GB logo on the graph, but I would appreciate it.

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x327]


Aw, why? Aaron's photobombing is legendary!

Anyhow, on one hand, I'd love to see the Pack ranked higher, given the asswhuppin' they laid in the last two weeks.

Then, I remember the previous 5 weeks, and I'm OK with where they are now.

Talk to me in December about Power Rankings :P
 
2012-10-23 08:14:43 PM

Treygreen13: Bunny Deville: Yay graf!

Bravo, Robsul82, for the magnificent Jake.

And keep up the trivia, TreyGreen, that was fun.

Thanks. I'll try to keep it going. May not be 15 questions every week but I'll try to keep it going.


It was nice. I'd say even 3 questions a week would be cool; maybe even post the answers a little later in the thread.
 
2012-10-23 08:24:06 PM

Di Atribe: Misplaced yat: The Chargers and the Cowboys seem to be performing an elaborate dance.

Yeah. I've been noticing a lot of similarities beyond devastatingly handsome quarterbacks.


Give us a kiss?
cdn.ksk.uproxx.com

Feels left out; slowly walks away:
cdn.ksk.uproxx.com

WHO ASKS BEFORE KISSING?
cdn.ksk.uproxx.com
 
2012-10-23 08:26:24 PM
Loved the trivia, and did surprisingly well, as the hints gave me 5 of the answers, and I knew my Skins one already
 
2012-10-23 08:27:45 PM

robsul82: Friends,


Yeah, he deserves it. Good job rob but lowest rank in memory? Wow.
 
2012-10-23 08:28:07 PM

skrame: Di Atribe: Misplaced yat: The Chargers and the Cowboys seem to be performing an elaborate dance.

Yeah. I've been noticing a lot of similarities beyond devastatingly handsome quarterbacks.

Give us a kiss?
[cdn.ksk.uproxx.com image 366x334]

Feels left out; slowly walks away:
[cdn.ksk.uproxx.com image 335x436]

WHO ASKS BEFORE KISSING?
[cdn.ksk.uproxx.com image 384x410]


Wow.

...


Just....wow.
 
2012-10-23 08:30:05 PM

Di Atribe: Also, graph 2 4 u


Is Indy a pony and who's Seattle?
 
2012-10-23 08:35:20 PM

xaks: skrame: Di Atribe: Misplaced yat: The Chargers and the Cowboys seem to be performing an elaborate dance.

Yeah. I've been noticing a lot of similarities beyond devastatingly handsome quarterbacks.

Give us a kiss?
[cdn.ksk.uproxx.com image 366x334]

Feels left out; slowly walks away:
[cdn.ksk.uproxx.com image 335x436]

WHO ASKS BEFORE KISSING?
[cdn.ksk.uproxx.com image 384x410]

Wow.

...


Just....wow.


I have to find the Al Michaels/Chris Collinsworth moutheyes pics that were made by some Farker.
 
2012-10-23 08:56:28 PM
I would like to take this opportunity to recognize Cutler's accomplishment last night. No, he didn't get the Jake, but he did somehow manage to not make my opponent win in Fantasy Football despite only needing like 22 points IIRC. After the stoning Wallace gave me, I thought I was totally dead in the water.

Oh well. Maybe between now & next week Wallace'll get his head out of his ass and learn to catch a motherfarking ball. Lord knows he's not smart enough to know why he did t, but maybe we'll luck out and he'll figure out wtf he did wrong.
 
2012-10-23 09:04:46 PM

rickythepenguin: just a shame we don't have a competent #2 (cough cough, Anquan Boldin, all is forgiven) to help strecth the field, as the cliche goes.


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?
 
2012-10-23 09:11:28 PM

Di Atribe: Useless facts:

Change from Week 1 to this week :
One 15 point drop: Chiefs
One 21 point jump: Vikings

Two teams ARE WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE (back at their Week 1 rankings): 49ers, Ravens

Number of times rankings have changed:
15 teams have changed every week
8 teams have changed all but once
1 team has only moved twice (Browns)

Difference between high rank & low rank:
Lowest fluctuation: Browns with 2
Highest fluctuation: Vikings with 22
Average fluctuation: 9.063

Overall fluctuation travel:
Smallest: Browns with 3
Highest: Seahawks with 39 and still no one gives them credit for anything :(

Teams hitting their highest rank this week: Giants, Bears, & Dolphins

Teams hitting their lowest rank this week: Chargers, Bengals, Panthers, & Buccaneers

Seven teams did not change rank: Eagles, Falcons, Lions, Broncos Chiefs, Jaguars, & Browns

Five teams have held the #1 spot 

And graphs rule. And so does football. And the Sports Tab. YEAH


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!
 
2012-10-23 09:14:38 PM

SkittlesAreYum: rickythepenguin: it is no secret he (like many players) has aspirations of Canton. Unfortunately, the combination of a bad QB sitch, a dreadful O-Line sitch, and constantly being doubled is going to hurt his numbers, spesh in a FF era where so many voters will be fixated on the raw data: how many catches, how many TDs. the test oft cited for HOF in any sport is, "how well did he match up to his contemporaries?"

Fitzgerald is the second-fastest WR to accumulate 10,000 yards.



yeah, and look up his last five full seasons (or, so far, plus five, meaning 2007, knowing that 2009 was Kurt's last year):


Catches / TDs
2007: 100, 10
2008: 96, 12
2009: 97, 13
2010: 90, 6
2011: 80, 8

2012: 40, 3 thru 7 games. what's that on pace for?

shame that his declining numbers are due to factors beyond his control (QB, O line) and a factor he has limited control (whether to double team). and again, when he retires, the narrative will be ZOMG HIS NUMBERS DECLINED by those who -- the inverse corollary of Revis Island -- demands doubles constantly, thereby freeing up a second WR. If Revis Island could dictate an offensive gameplan by taking away half the field, wehre's Fitzy island, who dictates a 9 man defense?
 
2012-10-23 09:25:34 PM

rickythepenguin: 2012: 40, 3 thru 7 games. what's that on pace for?


91.4 catches and 6.86 TDs. Close to his '10 figures.
 
2012-10-23 09:26:21 PM
mimg.ugo.com
 
2012-10-23 09:36:25 PM

JohnAnnArbor: The Lions suck.

But the QUALITY of suck is completely different than the way they used to suck. Now they have some very good players, playing very good football. But, as a team, they can't get it together.

Major improvement (if you look at the last decade or so of Lions play).


That's like the Marvin Lewis Bengals versus the Failucopia of Bengals from 1990-2003.

Players on Marvin Lewis teams
Carson Palmer, Justin Smith, Houshmanzadeh, Ochocinco, TO, Jonathan Joseph, Benson, Andy Dalton, AJ Green, Gresham, Peko, Geno Atkins, Pacman Jones
 
2012-10-23 09:56:30 PM

Olympic Trolling Judge: Oh good, the second lowest SOV in the league. 3-13 is definitely not out of the question.


I was hoping the Bengals would be 5-2 at this point, but I was predicting 4-3. Figured they'd lose to the Browns because division rivals rarely have long winning streaks over each other. The Dolphins loss was surprisingly bad. Glad I was in Disney World that weekend.

However the Bengals, being mediocre, always manage to steal a win from someone to make up for a doofus loss.
Chiefs & Raiders are wins.
Cowboys & Eagles are very winnable.
I expect the Broncos or Giants to be WTF wins.
Also the Ravens may still be able to give a 'rest game' win in week 17.

7-9
 
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 190 of 190 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report