Jump to content

Power Rankings and MVP Race Thread


RandyMossIsBoss

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Hunter2_1 said:
44 minutes ago, Pats#1 said:

Meh, Smith is playing very well and is the QB of the only undefeated team left. 

 

He's not playing as well or being asked to do as much as much as others but that's not the only thing taken into.

I thought it was the most valuable. As in, take him away and it goes to sssss. Take Smith away, I say they're still 4-0. Take Brady away, we are Jets 2006. Lol.

The Chiefs wouldn't have won week 1 without smith. Nor last night. I don't understand 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JBURGE25 said:

Alex Smith also killed you

Stat-wise, sure. But two of his huge plays weren't on him. One was a breakdown in our secondary, and one was Hunt being Hunt. 

I still think they're 4-0 with another QB, despite him having a career season. I'm impressed with A-Smith, but this is MVP chat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mse326 said:

Can I ask why you think the Titans are over the Texans after this weeks game?

You can't think of it like that, there are 30 other teams in the league remember. If you think the Texans are too low or the Titans are too high, that's another thing, but don't simply look at 2 teams and say well A beat B so A should be higher, when there is usually a C who beat A but lost to B. The Jaguars destroyed the Texans. The Titans destroyed the Jaguars. The Texans destroyed the Titans. See what I mean? I could probably have them a bit higher if I forgive the week 1 loss and assume things would have been different if Watson was playing instead of Savage, but I don't really believe that, I need to see more from Watson. Destroyed by a team that just lost to the Jets, slipped by a mediocre Bengals team, and lost to a Patriots team that is not looking too hot. As impressive as their victory was on Sunday, it's enough to forget about the prior 3 weeks and boost them more than 4 or 5 spots, unless you think Watson is finally "unleashed" and we will see the week 4 offense more than that week 2 offense (I'm gonna go ahead and guess it will meet in the middle).

 

 

5 hours ago, The BILLievers said:

Bills number 12 after beating the 3rd and 5th ranked team in consecutive weeks? and their only loss coming to the 10th ranked team on a last second dropped pass?

Keep it

Not until probably week 6 or 7 will preseason rankings have no influence. I had the Bills pretty low to start, so they have had to work their way up. Basically the Bills have to prove it to me, whereas a team like the Patriots or Packers get the benefit of the doubt early. Just how I like to do things. Plus, I think 12 is pretty fair for the Bills. 

 

4 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Falcons have to fall. 

Disagree. They dismantled a very good Packers team, beat a Lions team despite Matt Ryan throwing 3 INTs, and lost a close one to a good Bills team after losing Ryan's top targets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, RandyMossIsBoss said:

 

Disagree. They dismantled a very good Packers team, beat a Lions team despite Matt Ryan throwing 3 INTs, and lost a close one to a good Bills team after losing Ryan's top targets. 

Offense isn't anywhere near last year's production. Think they're top 5, but I can see some more losses coming if they don't start using their aggression on O again. Packers were beat up and Lions arguably should have won it at end. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RandyMossIsBoss said:

Not until probably week 6 or 7 will preseason rankings have no influence. I had the Bills pretty low to start, so they have had to work their way up. Basically the Bills have to prove it to me, whereas a team like the Patriots or Packers get the benefit of the doubt early. Just how I like to do things. Plus, I think 12 is pretty fair for the Bills. 

 

I guess if you're factoring in pre-season ranking I get where you're coming from (even though that's a bad way to rank), preseason rankings mean nothing imo, just a bunch of analysts stating their predictions.

I thought almost beating Carolina on the road, beating the Denver broncos and winning in Atlanta on the road in consecutive weeks would prove it but I guess since we're the bills we have to prove ourselves a little more haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

I thought it was the most valuable. As in, take him away and it goes to sssss. Take Smith away, I say they're still 4-0. Take Brady away, we are Jets 2006. Lol.

bs. Historically you take brady away and they are still a very good team. Pats are 2-2 and Brady is not the MVP right now, not even top 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when is MVP actually the most valuable player?  We have this argument every year, and it always ends the same way.

Alex Smith is playing much better than he gets credit for.  He's never tasked with carrying the team like the other great QBs, but he does what he's asked to do extremely well.

I'm not saying he deserves MVP though, I need to see more for that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:
10 hours ago, JBURGE25 said:

Alex Smith is by far my MVP at this point

No way. Hunt would still see them through. Without Brady, we would be 0-4. Plus he's playing the best football of his entire career.

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GSUeagles14 said:

bs. Historically you take brady away and they are still a very good team. Pats are 2-2 and Brady is not the MVP right now, not even top 3.

This team is 0-4 without Brady, it's not really debatable with how the defense has been playing.

He's the biggest name in the sport playing the best at the premiere position right now.

His team being 2-2 is the only reason why he's not #1 right now, but he is definitely top 3.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Pats#1 said:

This team is 0-4 without Brady, it's not really debatable with how the defense has been playing.

He's the biggest name in the sport playing the best at the premiere position right now.

His team being 2-2 is the only reason why he's not #1 right now, but he is definitely top 3.

 

 

cool, thats your opinion. history says otherwise, id agree its not debateable though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...