NFL Thread

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
My retro Kelly green long sleeve t will be here tomorrow. Thanks mom! LOL! I told her that I really liked the ones that some of the coaches were wearing. She bought herself me and my soon to be brother in law one. :rock

ahhh yea! :rock you got yourself a whole eagles nest! Im the only one in the family haha post pics when you get it!
 
nobody looked really good except NE this week & their defense is suspect

I would say Houston,Tennessee and Seatle both looked good. Sure Ten played the Raiders but Sea handled the team that most said would would win the west and well Hou knocking off Ind and looked pretty dominant in doing so.
 
I would say Houston,Tennessee and Seatle both looked good. Sure Ten played the Raiders but Sea handled the team that most said would would win the west and well Hou knocking off Ind and looked pretty dominant in doing so.

Houston has 15 or 16 starters that returned. I think the most in the league. When that happens you know good things will follow.
 
ahhh yea! :rock you got yourself a whole eagles nest! Im the only one in the family haha post pics when you get it!

37-01416-P.jpg
 
ESPN's power rankings are a joke. Greenbay barely beat Philly and they are ranked 2? :slap:lol

https://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings?year=2010&week=2
They should hold off on that until, at least, week 4 or 5. We know jack about teams after a single week. You don't know if one victory was actually impressive or not until that team's previous opponent plays someone else who won a game. Plus, if Calvin Johnson wasn't a gloryhound, the Lions would have beaten the Bears. Yet the Bears are ranked 7 places higher than the Lions?? And the Cowboys are higher than the Redskins by 6 positions despite actually losing to them?? If you are gonna rank teams based on one week, at least make sense with it. These rankings still seem based in the hype surrounding a team towards the end of last season. But lots of things have changed.
 
They should hold off on that until, at least, week 4 or 5. We know jack about teams after a single week. You don't know if one victory was actually impressive or not until that team's previous opponent plays someone else who won a game. Plus, if Calvin Johnson wasn't a gloryhound, the Lions would have beaten the Bears. Yet the Bears are ranked 7 places higher than the Lions?? And the Cowboys are higher than the Redskins by 6 positions despite actually losing to them?? If you are gonna rank teams based on one week, at least make sense with it. These rankings still seem based in the hype surrounding a team towards the end of last season. But lots of things have changed.

Exactly, at this point all they have to go buy is wins and losses. They should take that more into consideration when rating for at least the first few weeks.
 
Well...in defense of the power rankers...power ranking in general has to be taken for what it is...wishful thinking...and when they do it, they have to go on SOMETHING. The season is one game old and so power rankings for this year have to be taken even less seriously. But that goes for power rankings every year until about mid-season, when you can go back to taking them for what they are...wishful thinking.
 
I would say Houston,Tennessee and Seatle both looked good. Sure Ten played the Raiders but Sea handled the team that most said would would win the west and well Hou knocking off Ind and looked pretty dominant in doing so.

??????????:slap
 
It's actually the perfect time in the season to have power rankings based on one game.

Is this about as perfect as having people who never touched a football in their lives picking the League MVP? You gotta remember that the Giants lost their first 2 games the season they won the SB. Mid-season power rankings make more sense than week 1 power rankings.
 
Back
Top