Thread: Power Rankings: Week 3

"cajunvike" wrote:

"AWZeus" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

Atlanta BARELY beats Tampa and Carolina and gets SLAUGHTERED by the Saints...and they are still NINTH???

WTF???

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking?season=2006&week=4&lpos=spotlight&lid =tab3pos1

Vikes aren't getting any love either!!!

What are you talking about?
The Falcons kicked Carolina all over the field in Week 1, winning 20-6 - ON THE ROAD - and then rushed for nearly 300 yards in beating Tampa 14-3 in week 2.
I hardly call that "barely beats".

I think 9th is about right.
Last night was a once-in-a-lifetime setting for the Saints and they responded.

=Z=

Dude, the Saints are WAY BETTER than you and everyone else thinks...I have to give Sean Payton alot of credit (as much as it pains me to, since he used to be an assistant for the Cowturds).
He filled most of the holes in the defense with pretty decent FAs (and Simoneau from Philly in the trade for Stallworth) this offseason.
Brees is miles better than Brooks and by adding the ONLY Bush that has done any good in New Orleans, the Saints' offense is much more potent than may expected it would be.
Add to that offense the surprise of the draft in their seventh rounder from Hofstra and they could possible win the division!

The question wasn't about how low the Saints are ranked (and I think they are too low in that meaningless poll) but about how HIGH the Falcons are ranked, which I think is about right.

The Saints need to beat a quality opponent on the road before people will believe in them.

=Z=

who cares if they won the superbowl last year, steelers should not be #12

"Vikes_King" wrote:

who cares if they won the superbowl last year, steelers should not be #12

Well remember it's the media and if the steelers were 0-3 they would still be ranked that high! What about the giants being ranked that high and they are 1-2. Polls are really popularity contests and I for one am happy that we are not getting love from those leeches

"AWZeus" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"AWZeus" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

Atlanta BARELY beats Tampa and Carolina and gets SLAUGHTERED by the Saints...and they are still NINTH???

WTF???

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking?season=2006&week=4&lpos=spotlight&lid =tab3pos1

Vikes aren't getting any love either!!!

What are you talking about?
The Falcons kicked Carolina all over the field in Week 1, winning 20-6 - ON THE ROAD - and then rushed for nearly 300 yards in beating Tampa 14-3 in week 2.
I hardly call that "barely beats".

I think 9th is about right.
Last night was a once-in-a-lifetime setting for the Saints and they responded.

=Z=

Dude, the Saints are WAY BETTER than you and everyone else thinks...I have to give Sean Payton alot of credit (as much as it pains me to, since he used to be an assistant for the Cowturds).
He filled most of the holes in the defense with pretty decent FAs (and Simoneau from Philly in the trade for Stallworth) this offseason.
Brees is miles better than Brooks and by adding the ONLY Bush that has done any good in New Orleans, the Saints' offense is much more potent than may expected it would be.
Add to that offense the surprise of the draft in their seventh rounder from Hofstra and they could possible win the division!

The question wasn't about how low the Saints are ranked (and I think they are too low in that meaningless poll) but about how HIGH the Falcons are ranked, which I think is about right.

The Saints need to beat a quality opponent on the road before people will believe in them.

=Z=

So why is Atlanta ranked so high...they haven't beaten a quality opponent on the road yet...heck, they couldn't even beat the mediocre (if you believe the pollsters) Saints on the road!
The truth is that the media is biased...the Falcons have beaten an 0-3 team and a 1-2 team...and one of those was at home.
Meanwhile, the Saints have beaten an 0-3 team and a 1-2 team...both on the road.
Fact is, the Falcons are media darlings because of Vick...while the Saints are treated the same way that the Vikings are...like second-class citizens.

"cajunvike" wrote:

So why is Atlanta ranked so high...they haven't beaten a quality opponent on the road yet...heck, they couldn't even beat the mediocre (if you believe the pollsters) Saints on the road!
The truth is that the media is biased...the Falcons have beaten an 0-3 team and a 1-2 team...and one of those was at home.
Meanwhile, the Saints have beaten an 0-3 team and a 1-2 team...both on the road.
Fact is, the Falcons are media darlings because of Vick...while the Saints are treated the same way that the Vikings are...like second-class citizens.

I think beating Carolina in Carolina to start the season counts as "beat(ing) a quality opponent on the road".
Especially since, if we were talking about the Vikings, you'd be going on and on about how the Vikes beat a good team in Week 2.

=Z=