Local: Los Angeles, CA  (change)

 | 

Join the Topix community today: 

Sign Up

 | 

Sign In

Advertisment
Chicago Bears

Minnesota Vikings land a big free-agent catch in wide receiver ...

Comments (Page 9)

Showing posts 161 - 165 of 165
« prev | next »
Go to last post | Jump to page:

“Carl Eller still eats people!”

Joined: Jan 28, 2008
Comments: 355
Helena, Mt but living in VA
ISP Location: Hampton, VA
|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#197
Apr 8, 2008
 

Judged:

1

Thanks for going off on a side track and bringing in power rankings even though I never said anything about power rankings. I simply said by WINS the NFC North was the third strongest. By using wins and wins only it is just addition.

Power rankings involve many things like strength of opponents in wins and quality of those wins. Like Vikings kicking Giants butt with D but not O was a low quality win but running wild over the Bears was a high quality win.

Joined: Apr 2, 2008
Comments: 690
|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#198
Apr 8, 2008
 

Judged:

1

Stubby wrote:
Thanks for going off on a side track and bringing in power rankings even though I never said anything about power rankings. I simply said by WINS the NFC North was the third strongest. By using wins and wins only it is just addition.
Power rankings involve many things like strength of opponents in wins and quality of those wins. Like Vikings kicking Giants butt with D but not O was a low quality win but running wild over the Bears was a high quality win.
but yet you said
Stubby wrote:
<quoted text>
Its simple. The talking heads all said that the AFC was the tougher conference. They also said in the NFC, the North was a weak division. Since conferences play each other, the tougher conference should win more games. The way the announcers talk it was like AFC teams beat up NFC teams every time they played. Since conference tied at 128 wins apiece, how they they say one conference was tougher than the other. Also, How can the NFC North be considered weak, when their weakest teams (Bears, Lions) at 7-9 was better than or equal to almost half (15) the teams in the NFL.
When the entire Division had records better than half the NFL, I say that is a pretty good power indicator.
Hence why i provided accurate rankings that indicate "power"
wins is a terrible indicator period, in regards to the evaluation of a division or to soley evaluate a team....recent example, the patriots, they went 18-1 in the weakest division,do you think there the greatest team in history? The NFC north had balanced wins with 35 yet only 1 team in that division was over .500..i can go on and include the '72 dolphins and etc but you get my drift

“Carl Eller still eats people!”

Joined: Jan 28, 2008
Comments: 355
Helena, Mt but living in VA
ISP Location: Hampton, VA
|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#199
Apr 10, 2008
 
Wins is a terrible indicator? Are you insane? At the end of the day wins are the only thing that matters. So what if the Patriots went 18-1 in the weakest division. They also beat San Diego twice (11-5) Cleveland (10-6), Dallas (13-3), Indianapolis (13-3), Pittsburgh (10-6), and Jacksonville (11-5). When you beat all three other conference division winners and division winner from another conference, yea I say that means you're pretty damn good. So their 18-1 record is an indicator that that was one of the most powerful teams in history.
Keen Media Observer
|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#200
Apr 10, 2008
 
Another overpaid football player.

Joined: Apr 2, 2008
Comments: 690
|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#201
Apr 10, 2008
 
Stubby wrote:
Wins is a terrible indicator? Are you insane? At the end of the day wins are the only thing that matters. So what if the Patriots went 18-1 in the weakest division. They also beat San Diego twice (11-5) Cleveland (10-6), Dallas (13-3), Indianapolis (13-3), Pittsburgh (10-6), and Jacksonville (11-5). When you beat all three other conference division winners and division winner from another conference, yea I say that means you're pretty damn good. So their 18-1 record is an indicator that that was one of the most powerful teams in history.
yet they played 2games each in there division against the likes of miami,jets,buffalo all very poor teams in there division that combined for a grand total of 12 wins and 36 losses!!Not to mention having a very soft schedule and yet almost losing to teams like the eagles and losing to the giants in the superbowl, a team they almost lost to earlier in the season....yeah..they are a great team,had a nice run had alot of luck on there side. Historic? no,legendary? hardly...Great? yeah sure.
Thats like saying the '72 dolphins where the best team ever. You want historic legendary teams? Go google the '85 bears...maybe some old cowboy's and 49'er teams. Did we mention that the mighty Patriots lost to a 10-6 nfc giants team? That why we invented power rankings that compliment Wins and losses. This has nothing to do with the topic anymore and berrian is still overpaid! lol
Showing posts 161 - 165 of 165
« prev | next »
Go to last post | Jump to page:
Type in your comments to post to the forum
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Chicago Bears Discussions
Topic Updated Last By Comments
What's Goin' On: Bears' O raises more questions... 18 min Otis 209
'A step back' for Rodgers, Packers 38 min james roberts 1
Bears' decision is safe - and sound 40 min Chris 40
Bears fans excited with Hanie's game 1 hr _DiMz_ 17
Is there still hope for Rex? You bet (from Feb '08) 1 hr Beer vendor ... 582
No harm in trying out Hanie 1 hr flowergirl 127
Orton Named Bears' Starting QB 2 hr Deep Thinker 10
Related Topix Forums: Sports, NFL Players, NFL Football, Minnesota Vikings, Bernard Berrian