Peter King Explains Ranking The Skins Below The Cowboys

[Califan007 The Constipated]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/10/07/mail/1.html

• I AM MAD, OBVIOUSLY. From Don, of Burbank, Calif.: "Great column, Peter. Look forward to it every week. How is it, though, that Washington beats Dallas last week, then this week beats Philly on the road while Dallas struggles to beat Cincy at home, and Dallas is still ranked above Washington? You mean that if those two teams play each other right now, you still like Dallas? Puzzling.''

You're not the only one to question that ranking, Don. I thought a lot about that Sunday night on my way home from NBC. And I realize the product on the field hasn't shown Dallas to be better than Washington so far. It came down to this: If Washington and Dallas met on a neutral field in Wichita right now, I think Dallas would win. I trust Romo sits to pee a little more than Campbell right now.

The defenses are a wash, and I might like Washington's a little more, particularly after the goal-line stand at the Eagles. It's very, very close. If Dallas plays generously on defense at Arizona this week, I might change my mind. But here's what it comes down to for me, bottom line: I thought Dallas was the best team in football for much of September, and we've seen them blow out Cleveland on the road, score 41 on a tough defense (Philadelphia), and whack Green Bay pretty well on the road. I still like them a lot, and a smidgen better than Washington.

[Touchdown Redskins]

So if we played on a neutral field in a week, they'd win, but when we played at their home two weeks ago, we won?

Good logic Peter.

[RawBBQSauce]

Peter King is a tool. Who cares.

[ArsheimSkins]

So if we played on a neutral field in a week, they'd win, but when we played at their home two weeks ago, we won?

Good logic Peter.

Precisely what I was thinking. I think he's still trying to convince himself :doh:

O, and I just remembered that rankings don't mean ****

[skinsfan1523]

yeah the defense is a wash

[flexxskins]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/10/07/mail/1.html

If Washington and Dallas met on a neutral field in Wichita right now, I think Dallas would win. I trust Romo sits to pee a little more than Campbell right now.

Why?

He still gives no reasonable explaination as to why, other than he just can't stand the Washington Redskins.

[BillyKilmer]

Great keep under the Radar

[Custer]

Interesting.. None of the talking haids wanna give a prompt where it's deserved...

Personally, Maybe, Danny wouldn't hire'em so they keep a woody on the skins...

None of it matters.

Quod erat demonstratum (Even dumbass flatlanders know some latin... )

[Califan007 The Constipated]

So in my eyes, what King is saying there (the bolded parts) is that:

1) Dallas isn't playing better than the Skins, but he still thinks they're better anyway.

2) He trusts Romo sits to pee over JC, despite the fact that Romo sits to pee has made a ton more turnovers, was outperformed by JC in their only match up this season so far, and trusts Romo sits to pee more even though Campbell has been arguably THE best QB in the league during the 4th quarter.

3) He thought Dallas was the best team in the league, and he's not gonna let a little thing like actual on-field performance change his mind.

[westcoasthog]

That didn't make any sense at all! What a donkey!

[cphil006]

You are as good as your record. They played a week ago and Washington won.

Peter King thinks his power rankings are relevant. His mistake. The week wasn't even over before he ranked these. There was still the Monday night game.

[whatmeworry]

Why?

He still gives no reasonable explaination as to why

He doesn't have to. He's Peter King. That said, who cares realy?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

So if we played on a neutral field in a week, they'd win, but when we played at their home two weeks ago, we won?

Good logic Peter.

Obviously the Cowboys fans tilted the playing field in the Skins favor lol ...

[AllAboutSkins08]

logic, who needs it?

[DieselPwr44]

This is a guy who went for years telling us he didn't think Monk was HOF worthy.

Why would you expect anything less now??

[kevinklein]

So if we played on a neutral field in a week, they'd win, but when we played at their home two weeks ago, we won?

Good logic Peter.

My thoughts exactly. That mother ****er has a doorknob for a brain.

[BigRay]

I have an headache right now :doh:. That didn't make not one ounce of sense.

[Haszard4]

Definitely a Cowboys Jock Sniffer.

Personally I could care less.

there all a bunch of tools

......

[flexxskins]

He doesn't have to. He's Peter King. That said, who cares realy?

Well, obviously a few fans do. There was a thread created and a few responses at that.

BTW, I merely made an observation and asked a question. Not a whole lot of caring went into it.:nana:

[Special K]

People with King's idiotic logic really scare me. What a moron.

[PiLfan]

You're not the only one to question that ranking, Don. I thought a lot about that Sunday night on my way home from NBC. And I realize the product on the field hasn't shown Dallas to be better than Washington so far. It came down to this: If Washington and Dallas met on a neutral field in Wichita right now, I think Dallas would win. I trust Romo sits to pee a little more than Campbell right now.

The defenses are a wash, and I might like Washington's a little more, particularly after the goal-line stand at the Eagles. It's very, very close. If Dallas plays generously on defense at Arizona this week, I might change my mind. But here's what it comes down to for me, bottom line: I thought Dallas was the best team in football for much of September, and we've seen them blow out Cleveland on the road, score 41 on a tough defense (Philadelphia), and whack Green Bay pretty well on the road. I still like them a lot, and a smidgen better than Washington.

With that kind of dizzying logic apparently swirling around in his head, is there any wonder why it took so freakin' long for him to come around to the idea of Art Monk being a hall of famer?

[kingfish50]

God, what an ass wipe! lol. Neutral field as his reasoning and trusting Tony "Turnover" Romo sits to pee over JC? Laughable and plain stupid.

This guy gets paid all that money to come up with something as asinine as this..:doh::doh:

What gets me is that as mentally challenged as he is, this idiot gets to vote on who gets in the Hall of Fame. I'm glad he had a change of heart about Art Monk but once an ass, always an ass.

:dallasuck:dallasuck:dallasuck:dallasuck:dallasuck:dallasuck:dallasuck

[BigRay]

It's just a puzzling comment all away around they are still better even though the Skins went in to Dallas as a double digit underdog and took them out to the woodshed. The score was no indiction of the domination the Skins had on the Cowboys. But, they are better thanks a lot Peter.

[Die Hard]

The Cowboy victory over the Packers in Lambeau.... has lost some of its shine after the Packers got trounced by the Falcons at home last weekend.

The Packers are 2-3 right now. The Eagles are 2-3. The Bengals are 0-5. The Browns are 1-3. Those account for the Cowboys victories.

How does beating the 2-3 Packers become a "signature" victory that gives you street credibility?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

The Cowboy victory over the Packers in Lambeau.... has lost some of its shine after the Packers got trounced by the Falcons at home last weekend.

The Packers are 2-3 right now. The Eagles are 2-3. The Bengals are 0-5. The Browns are 1-3. Those account for the Cowboys victories.

How does beating the 2-3 Packers become a "signature" victory that gives you street credibility?

King said before the Cowboys/Packers game that if the Cowboys win that game, "we might have to rethink our views that Tony Romo sits to pee can't win the big game" lol (or words to that effect). So King has staked his logic claim to that laughable concept and viewpoint.