Top 5 and bottom 5

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 12:01 am

Since we already have perps proclaiming who the bestest and worstest teams are in the NFL, making playoff predictions, and generally being obnoxious, ignorant buffoons after just two weeks...

I reckon it's time to fire this annual rite of passage up. This topic is usually good for hysterical laughter by Week 10 as we base our rankings on last weeks results and the current flavors of the month.

So here goes.

AFC Top 5
1. Patsies - just crown 'em now, damnit
2. Clots - 2nd place is no disgrace
3. Blots - they went 14-2 last year - ask mv how much last year means, you goddamn braindead idiot!
4. Mules - just because Ratahan is a friggin' genius
5. Texicans - seriously feel good story of the year so far. Ask Rumps, he feels good

NFC Top 5
1. Cowsnatches - Romo for President!
2. Forty Whiners - somebody has to finish 2nd
3. Seabags - um yeah, ok
4. Deadskins - smoke and mirrors
5. Lions - Two and freaking zero, beyotches

I'll refrain from posting the bottom 5's for now. Need more inspiration.

Bucmonkey · Post by **Bucmonkey** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 12:12 am

Overall count ?

1 NE
2 IND
3 SD
4 DAL
5 PIT

28 OAK
29 BUF
30 PHI
31 KC
32 ATL

upstart · Post by **upstart** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 12:20 am

Top five

1) The Dynasty of this century
2) Indy
3)Bolts*
4) Steelers
5)Boys

worst

1) KC.
2)bills
3)the dogfighters
4)chokland
5) J.E.T.S: jets- jets- jets

* wimps

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:08 am

Top 3

1. Pats
2. Colts
3. Steelers

Take any two of the next 3 to round out a top 5 list.

49ers
Texans
Broncos

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:12 am

War Wagon wrote:3. Blots

Bucmonkey wrote:3 SD

Have you seen them play this year? Only a head coach as pitiful as Norv Turner can turn 14-2 into 9-7. What the fuck are you a-holes smoking?

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:23 am

Hey, it's my first stab, and mv assured me that last years record means so much, I thought I'd throw that bone in there just for him.

sigh... everyones a critic.

Ok, amended AFC ranking:

3. Pukers.

Happy now?

Bucmonkey · Post by **Bucmonkey** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:28 am

Hydro....what you smokin?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:55 am

War Wagon wrote:Hey, it's my first stab, and mv assured me that last years record means so much, I thought I'd throw that bone in there just for him.

It doesn't mean everything, but it's generally a pretty good indicator. Especially if a given team hasn't made any significant changes to the roster. And when you're only 2 games into the season, it's the best set of facts to form an opinion from.

Of course you could argue "then keep your mouth shut until we see more football," but why log onto a sports forum if you don't have an opinion?

RevLimiter · Post by **RevLimiter** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:06 am

upstart wrote:1) The Dynasty of this century

There IS none....and FUCK whoever deleted my previous post on this.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:28 am

RevLimiter wrote:FUCK whoever deleted my previous post on this.

I think PSU set up an auto-delete function whereby if the first keystrokes of any post come back as "CTL+V", then it's axed. Sorry.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:35 am

RevLimiter wrote:FUCK whoever deleted my previous post on this.

So much for that whole "and you can't do a FUCKING thing about it!" eh?

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 12:33 pm

Back on topic:

Top 5:
1. New England
2. Indy
3. Pittsburgh
4. Dallas
5. Denver

Bottom 5:
1. Atlanta
2. Kansas City
3. Giants
4. Dolphins
5. Raiders

See You Next Wednesday · Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:08 pm

How in the world can anybody have the Broncos in their top 5?

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:27 pm

See You Next Wednesday wrote:How in the world can anybody have the Broncos in their top 5?

good question.......

DF, explain yourself....

RumpleForeskin · Post by **RumpleForeskin** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:39 pm

1. New England - can anyone stop this team?
2. Dallas - that defense will get better and we already know how good the offense is
3. Indianapolis - the offense is great. The defense i am still not sold on
4. Pittsburgh - Until they play a worthy opponent, I can't rank them much higher at this point.
5. Green Bay - that defense is damn good. If the running game ever gets on track, then the offense will be just as good.

28. Kansas City - they showed some fight against Chicago. Their defense makes gives them this higher grade
29. Miami - this team is so bad. Trent Green was a terrible transaction
30. St Louis - WTF. What a bad start to promising season. Steven Jackson better realize he is Steven fucking Jackon
31. New York Jets - Eric Manginer is coaching his way out of a job.
32. Atlanta Falcons - Need I say more

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:23 pm

RumpleForeskin wrote:32. Atlanta Falcons - Need I say more

What's cracking me up, is they went and spent money on a QB. I'm thinking they could have Bart Montana Unitas for a QB, and with the beating he'd take behind that "offensive line," he;d still be lucky to complete 40%.

Maybe they should have spent that cash on someone who understood the concept of "blocking"?

Vick didn't rack up those gaudy rushing numbers becuase he was some once-in-a-lifetime-talent... after a few seasons, he was just terrified to stay in the pocket. Give Joey or Lefty a couple of seasons of that, and they'll probably end up rushing for 1000, too, due to neccessity born of fear.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:27 pm

Felix wrote:
See You Next Wednesday wrote:How in the world can anybody have the Broncos in their top 5?
good question.......

DF, explain yourself....

Well its kind of a gut call. I think Cutler will continue to improve as a QB. After gutting out a couple of tough wins, it builds a little character knowing you can lead your team down the field in the clutch. Combine the growing confidence of a young quarterback with a solid running game and I think you have a top 5 team. It's not like any other team is a glaring top 5 team from what I've been watching. So thats my story and I'm sticking to it.

As for Dallas, I would say it might be a slight case of homerism, but not by much. Dallas' offense is pretty sick right now, and thats something Charger fan knows nothing about. Once we get some people back from injury on the defensive side of the ball, it will be a recipe for success. My pick of Dallas will be justified after marching into Soldier Field and spanking the defending NFC champs.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:28 pm

RumpleForeskin wrote:5. Green Bay - that defense is damn good. If the running game ever gets on track, then the offense will be just as good.

I’m a Packer fan, and you’re an idiot. The running game will never get going this year with the collection of scrubs they’ve assembled. The passing game is only as good as Favre’s patience and judgment, and the receivers are not great.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:48 pm

mvscal wrote:
DallasFanatic wrote:Dallas' offense is pretty sick right now, and thats something Charger fan knows nothing about.
The Chargers just led the league in scoring last year and have some of the best offensive skill position talent in the league.

The Cowflops have played nobody this year. The Chargers have faced two of the best defensive units in the league.

Wake up and smell the coffee mv. Pockface will destroy this team. See Washington and Oakland for further details.

atomicdad · Post by **atomicdad** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:19 pm

What the fuck are you a-holes smoking?

Not smoking anything, but since you ask, Fentanol and Vicodin. Life is good right now. :D :D

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:36 pm

DallasFanatic wrote: My pick of Dallas will be justified after marching into Soldier Field and spanking the defending NFC champs.

Testify, My Brutha!

RumpleForeskin · Post by **RumpleForeskin** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:41 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:I’m a Packer fan, and you’re an idiot. The running game will never get going this year with the collection of scrubs they’ve assembled. The passing game is only as good as Favre’s patience and judgment, and the receivers are not great.

Wynn should see more time after his performance on Sunday. Jackson just can't get it going. They have enough there to have a serviceable running game. I know this because the Texans were able to this last year with the services of Ron Dayne, Samkon Gado, and Wali Lundy. The Texans won 3 of their 6 games last year on just running the ball. The Pack have the same 3 headed monster when Morency comes back. I think the running game will improve IMO. Couple that with Favre being a bit more steady as a QB out on the field and Green Bay's offense will do enough to win ballgames.

RumpleForeskin · Post by **RumpleForeskin** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:46 pm

San Diego still seems like they should be second to only the Pats, but Norv Turner can fuck up a good thing. I'd put SD #3 on my original list, but I need to see better play out of the offense before I can throw them in my top 5. The Jets had much better success moving the ball than the Chargers did and that ain't good.

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:49 pm

Oh, the Texans did it last year, well, that cements it. Pack should be awesome.

Good fucking lord are you dumb.

Almost as stupid as your statement that the Texans win over the Colts should be the blueprint other teams use. Like nobody else knew about running on the Colts.

And just so you know, douchenozzle, nobody looks at game tape of the Texans last year unless they are trying to figure out how to audible into a sack!

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:53 pm

RumpleForeskin wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:I’m a Packer fan, and you’re an idiot. The running game will never get going this year with the collection of scrubs they’ve assembled. The passing game is only as good as Favre’s patience and judgment, and the receivers are not great.
Wynn should see more time after his performance on Sunday. Jackson just can't get it going. They have enough there to have a serviceable running game. I know this because the Texans were able to this last year with the services of Ron Dayne, Samkon Gado, and Wali Lundy. The Texans won 3 of their 6 games last year on just running the ball. The Pack have the same 3 headed monster when Morency comes back. I think the running game will improve IMO. Couple that with Favre being a bit more steady as a QB out on the field and Green Bay's offense will do enough to win ballgames.

Wynn had one big run. Other than that it was 9 carries, 12 yards. Morency is not a feature back. They cannot win on Farve’s arm alone. He’ll start to get frustrated and then he’ll force passes which will become easy picks. We’ve seen it before.

They should have gone after Moss in the off-season, and they should have found a feature back once they decided the let Ahman Green go. Team should go 8-8.

RumpleForeskin · Post by **RumpleForeskin** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:01 pm

Headjuice swallower wrote:Oh, the Texans did it last year, well, that cements it. Pack should be awesome.

Good fucking lord are you dumb.

Hey dumbfuck, do you know how to read and interpret a post? What I said was that the Texans had a similar running back by committee thing like the Packers have going this year. I never said Green Bay is a lot like the Texans in the 10 other facets of the team.

Put on some crocks and find an escalator.

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:31 pm

Do I know how to read and interpret a post? I sure do. I interpret everything you say as a myopic Texans fan who thinks the NFL starts and stops at their doorstop. completely retarded statements like...

that game plan worked well for the Texans last year en route to their first ever victory against the Colts late last season. Its possible other teams catch on to this"

Maybe other teams catch on to this? Like the Texans are ground breakers and the rest of the league is a bunch of mouth breathing retards.

Then we get brilliance like this...

"They have enough there to have a serviceable running game. I know this because the Texans were able to this last year"

And just when I thought you might pull your head out of your ass for a breath, you reach into the tard handbook and pull this out

Perhaps, you, Btard, and mv should logout for a few days and attend trolling 101 and then we can revisit things afterwards.

The every faithful, I'm not a tard... I was trolling.

Listen up, slappy. I understand your jeans are creamed that the Texas are 2-0. It shows in every post you make. But until they break off, oh I don't know... A .500 season at least once in franchise history nobody is going to give a rats ass about your interpretation of what they've done, are doing, or might ever do. They've been a fucking nightmare of a franchise. And until the list of meaningful Texans victories is longer than reasons why rump is a tard, expect nothing but blank stares when you bust off brilliance like " I know this because the Texans were able to this last year"

Believe me, no one is jealous of that extra chromosome you got when Grandpa fucked your mother!

RumpleForeskin · Post by **RumpleForeskin** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 8:07 pm

Incest smack, huh. It should be no surprise that originality was lost on you long before you stepped into a message board.

If I am so myopic as you indicated, then why are the the Texans NOT listed in my top 5, why did I pick them to lose Sunday's game against Carolina in ALL 3 of my pick'em games, why did I post this...

Overall, I don't see why it isn't a realistic goal for the Texans to finish 8-8 or 9-7 this season. It would be one more step forward in getting this team to the playoffs for the first time in the franchise's short history.

You are reaching, headpleaser. Why don't you go back and read all of my posts again. I have been far from myopic in my posts about the Texans and I RARELY use the Texans as an example when discussing other teams. In the Green Bay discussion, I felt it was appropiate and pretty much accurate as to what Green Bay faces this year with their running back tandom just like the 2006 Texans.

Now, are these really the arguements you have against me? Phone bills and a footlocker?

Go fuck yourself.

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:05 pm

RumpleForeskin wrote:Why don't you go back and read all of my posts again.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I have done nothing to deserve a punishment that extreme. Wasn't walking into a message board enough. It kind of smarted.

Keep swinging your purse, little fella. You're bound to make contact at some point.

atomicdad · Post by **atomicdad** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:26 pm

I hear ya Rumple, keep it up.

I just took another Vicadon about 45 minutes ago also......

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:11 am

1. Patriots
2. Colts
3. Steelers
4. Cowboys
5. Packers

28. Bills
29. Jets
30. Giants
31. Saints
32. Falcons

rozy · Post by **rozy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:42 am

That is TWICE now someone has picked the Packers.

Could someone point me to the NFL forum since this resembles more of a shit troll convention?

Newsflash, Shoalz, your team and my team both are better than Green Bay at virtually every single skill position on offense. Every one of them.

RACK HH dismantling Rumpleshitstain, btw. But the 'pokes still suck out loud, 'specially on defense.

1. Patriots
2. Steelers

3-32 everyone else so far with the Pokes, Texans, Colts, and Chargers having just a slight nose of lead among them.

orcinus · Post by **orcinus** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:48 am

1. Patriots
2. Colts
3. Chargers
4. Steelers
5. Cowboys

5. Giants/Chiefs/Raiders/Saints
4. Jets
3. Bills
2. Jets
1. Falcons

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:54 am

rozy wrote:Newsflash, Shoalz, your team and my team both are better than Green Bay at virtually every single skill position on offense. Every one of them.

The Packers are better than the Lions because they actually have a defense...not just a front 4. I'd advice everyone to temper their views on the Lions because they are one major hit on Kitna away from being a team that probably isn't capable of winning a single game. They're 2-0 because they've beaten two of the worst teams in the NFL not because they're actually good.

RevLimiter · Post by **RevLimiter** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:57 am

rozypalms wrote:Newsflash, Shoalz, your team and my team both are better than Green Bay at virtually every single skill position on offense. Every one of them.

Holy.

FUCK.

You did NOT just infer that Jon FUCKING Kitna is better than Brett Favre....DID YOU????

Simply one of the most IDIOTIC posts ever submitted on this board. PERIOD.

rozy · Post by **rozy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 11:23 am

Damn, you're easy.

May I suggest english as a first language?

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:18 pm

Top Five
1. Denver Broncos
2. Detroit Lions
3. Houston Texans
4. Washington Racistskins
5. San Francisco 49ers

5(a). Mike Lupica

Bottom Five
32. Oakland Raiders
31. Philadelphia Eagles
30. Buffalo Bills
29. Miami Dolphins
28. NY Jets

KUTTER was run!

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:23 pm

poptart wrote: KUTTER was run!

No shit.

Can't do one of these threads with-out remembering how seriously old KUT took to them. Flame war city.

Joe in PB · Post by **Joe in PB** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:33 pm

Shoalzie wrote:
rozy wrote:Newsflash, Shoalz, your team and my team both are better than Green Bay at virtually every single skill position on offense. Every one of them.

The Packers are better than the Lions because they actually have a defense...not just a front 4. I'd advice everyone to temper their views on the Lions because they are one major hit on Kitna away from being a team that probably isn't capable of winning a single game. They're 2-0 because they've beaten two of the worst teams in the NFL not because they're actually good.

Good take Shoalzie. The Lions are improved no doubt, but any team is only as strong as its weakest link, and ineffective or inconsistent defense is a major weak link.

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:29 pm

RumpleForeskin wrote: I felt it was appropiate and pretty much accurate as to what Green Bay faces this year with their running back tandom just like the 2006 Texans.

Ok, I thought I was done with you, but I just have to point out one thing

If you wanted to make a point about effective running back tandems I think I might start with, well I don't know. let's start with the Super Bowl champs. Addai and Rhodes combined for over 1700 yards. that's getting it done.

Last year both Super Bowl teams, 5 other playoff teams (Dallas, New England, New Orleans, San Diego and Seattle.) had tandems who rushed for more than 500 yds each.

Many of those teams 2nd rusher had higher totals than Houston's leading rusher. Ron Dayne had 612 yards last year. When the top two rushers on your team barely break 1000 yds combined, you STFU about them being a successful RB tandem.

You may now resume being a tard.