cphil006 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 This Giants game is so crucial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Emrys Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 How can the Feebles be number 4? They have wins against 3 of the worst teams in the NFL. ESPN never ceases to amaze. Now the Redskins won b/c of a "rash of injuries." Tom Jackson must be behind that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheJoe1013 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 12) Jacksonville Credit the Jacksonville defense for not making excuses despite a rash of injuries. 'We got out butts kicked. Plain and simple,' DE Paul Spicer said. 17) REDSKINS Well sure, Jacksonville's defense didn't need to make excuses because they knew ESPN would do it for them ike they just did there. Thats funny. Jacksonville says they got their butts kicked, but ESPN says it was mostly because of injuries. Good job ESPN. Way to make excuses for someone's loss. Nevermind what they said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I seem to remember reading this somewhere.... http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=173076 :doh: wow 2 away from each other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnLockesGhost Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I seem to remember reading this somewhere....:doh: wow 2 away from each other No need to be sanctimonious. I looked, it happens. Merge threads, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 but ESPN says it was mostly because of injuries. You do know that you added this part in right? If you read the Redskin portion it seems they think it was because Santana Moss made big plays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnLockesGhost Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Let's wait for the Week 17 Rankings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I think 17 is fine for a 2-2 team that many even on a Redskins board were doubting. The defense needs to re-establish itself and the offense needs to prove they can keep producing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revallenjr Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I think the rankings are bogus. Sure Chicago and Indianapolis are ure probably where they belong, but Baltimore is 4-0 thanks to games vs the Raiders, Titans, and Browns. Their apponants combined record is 3-11. The Eagles are not the best 3-1 team out there, but they have them ranked #4. Their opponents combined record is 4-11. The Patriots have played a tough schedule (Opponents combined record of 9-6) and they are 3-1. That is impressive, especially how they handled the Bengals. I think we are right were we belong right now, because it is still an early season. We will continue to climb this list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quixote Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Heres the proof that if given computers, internet access, and two days.... monkeys could write for espn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saeth29 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Heres the proof that if given computers' date=' internet access, and two days.... monkeys could write for espn.[/quote']Animals in pants... they're called animals in pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuiceMan_74 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 honestly....i dont see their O giving our D problems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I think the rankings are bogus. Sure Chicago and Indianapolis are ure probably where they belong, but Baltimore is 4-0 thanks to games vs the Raiders, Titans, and Browns. Their apponants combined record is 3-11. The Eagles are not the best 3-1 team out there, but they have them ranked #4. Their opponents combined record is 4-11. The Patriots have played a tough schedule (Opponents combined record of 9-6) and they are 3-1. That is impressive, especially how they handled the Bengals. I think we are right were we belong right now, because it is still an early season. We will continue to climb this list. ... Your supposed to beat the teams that your supposed to beat. The Ravens did that. That and they beat a good Chargers team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UltimateSkins Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 How can the Saints and Rams be ranked higher? Does anyone actually believe the Redskins would lose to either of these teams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elvis Nixon Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I actually like when the media give us no respect. What I like even better is that the Iggles are set up for a big fall... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 How can the Saints and Rams be ranked higher? Does anyone actually believe the Redskins would lose to either of these teams? Right now they are both 3-1 and we are 2-2. Its still early why worry about some stupid power rankings? Saints have played well and the Rams did good against Denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jett Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Eagles ranked fourth!?!? The same rankings have the teams they beat at 25th, 28th and 31st. And they were beaten by a team ranked 18th. I am not down on the Eagles talent. They have a good team and might end up winning the East (all four teams are good enough to win), but they have proven nothing yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboyinDC Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 The Eagles should drop a lot once they play a real team this week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aqq Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Well sure, Jacksonville's defense didn't need to make excuses because they knew ESPN would do it for them ike they just did there.Thats funny. Jacksonville says they got their butts kicked, but ESPN says it was mostly because of injuries. Good job ESPN. Way to make excuses for someone's loss. Nevermind what they said. what the hell were their injuries anyway?...i dont think they had any big injuries on the defensive side of the ball. Is this the work of fat len trying to discredit out win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 lets hope we break the Giants season this sunday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Eh. I find it real difficult to get worked up over this. But I find it very funny how some of you can pick this apart and generate such outrage over supposed slights. The Saints are ranked higher than us?? We only moved up 3 spots???? Those ****S!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGix2 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Come on.. those power rankings are as bad as teh NCAA top 25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jivelikenice Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I think we're getting a little carried away here with our sensitivity towards the media. The Jags beat the Super Bowl Champs and the Cowboys while losing two very close games to us and the Colts. We beat the Jags BUT it was at our home. We also lost badly to the Cowboys while the Jags have been competitive in all of their games. The Steelers are the Champs. Yes they're 1-2 but they get the benefit of the doubt. The team I have a problemn with is the Giants....They're defense has been terrible. They absolutely belong further down the rankings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnLockesGhost Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 what the hell were their injuries anyway?...i dont think they had any big injuries on the defensive side of the ball. Is this the work of fat len trying to discredit out win? I only know of the one Defensive End they have out for the rest of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceviker Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 That's bs - esp. for the steelers and jags. We'll see what people say once we beat the Giants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.