|
|
#11
09-11-2007, 08:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Sluss\'s AFC Rankings
Regarding SD's playcalling in week 1, I kind of thought the exact opposite. It looked like Chicago D was the best unit on the field, but neither offense was able to get much done...and then SD started getting innovative. They busted out a couple of plays from deep in the playbook and managed to string some drives together at the end. I give a lot of credit to the coaching staff for making adjustments and taking some gambles there to beat a strong Chicago D.
|
|
#12
09-11-2007, 08:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sluss\'s AFC Rankings
Haha, this is actually pretty funny. About a week before the season started, I PMed PokerFink asking for some pointers on how to do this. I was actually going to do an AFC Ranking system. I was in the process of writing it today/tommorow, but it would of been up tommorow. Maybe you would like to work on it together, or you want to fly solo on this?
(I was going to do PokerFink's way of ranking, using top 4 as division, but to go with yours) I would put it BMore/Pitts/Cinci as 5/6/7. Jacksonville is a really confusing team after week one. If not for Penny's injury, I would be tempted to put it as Tenn/NYJ/Jax as 8/9/10. If Jax's defense (specifically the run) does not show up, they have to go down in rankings. Everything else I agree with
|
|
#13
09-11-2007, 08:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sluss\'s AFC Rankings
NE is so set, after this week Moss will become the perfect weapon. Solid threat + huge distraction opening up Stallworth and Welker.
(I said that Moss would have a better year than Harrison before the season).
|
|
#14
09-11-2007, 08:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sluss\'s AFC Rankings
[ QUOTE ]
Jacksonville is a really confusing team after week one. [/ QUOTE ]Standard. Always a confusing team. Any given week they could handily beat any team and then lose in spectacular fashion to any team next week. Least consistent team in NFL by far.
|
|
#16
09-11-2007, 10:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sluss\'s AFC Rankings
[ QUOTE ]
lol @ everyone who ranks the Colts so high [/ QUOTE ] Que? They teabaged the best team in the NFC last year (try playing that NFCCG indoors in NO and see how the outcome changes). Cody
|
|
#17
09-11-2007, 10:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sluss\'s AFC Rankings
[ QUOTE ]
Haha, this is actually pretty funny. About a week before the season started, I PMed PokerFink asking for some pointers on how to do this. I was actually going to do an AFC Ranking system. I was in the process of writing it today/tommorow, but it would of been up tommorow. Maybe you would like to work on it together, or you want to fly solo on this? (I was going to do PokerFink's way of ranking, using top 4 as division, but to go with yours) I would put it BMore/Pitts/Cinci as 5/6/7. Jacksonville is a really confusing team after week one. If not for Penny's injury, I would be tempted to put it as Tenn/NYJ/Jax as 8/9/10. If Jax's defense (specifically the run) does not show up, they have to go down in rankings. Everything else I agree with [/ QUOTE ] I'd be willing to help out if we're going to make a kabal of posters to determine the rankings. Cody
|
|
#18
09-12-2007, 12:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sluss\'s AFC Rankings
I think Pittsburgh is clearly #4, and closer to #3 than #5. Last year's Ben was an aberration. Dude likely shouldn't have even been playing. He's a big time QB with weapons and a very good D.
|
|
#20
09-12-2007, 12:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sluss\'s AFC Rankings
[ QUOTE ]
lol @ everyone who ranks the Colts so high [/ QUOTE ] L O L Pittsburgh should be at least #5. No way Bengals, Ravens, or Broncos are better than them right now.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
