ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Poop ***Official Knowmo2724 homer-2000 thread*** (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=211188)

Codered 12-11-2012 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGM (Post 9200276)
Not at all. We'll have a young franchise QB. They'll have one more year of Jughead with nothing behind him.

If you say so.

MagicHef 12-11-2012 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorter (Post 9200269)
LMAO, so now recent results matter but the rankings shouldn't reflect results that are "too distant"?

ROFL

?

Look, if you really can't understand why 3 of the 4 rankings posted in this thread have the Broncos above the Texans, and all 4 have them above the Falcons, I don't know what to tell you. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that you hate the Broncos.

Sorter 12-11-2012 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9200301)
?

Look, if you really can't understand why 3 of the 4 rankings posted in this thread have the Broncos above the Texans, and all 4 have them above the Falcons, I don't know what to tell you. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that you hate the Broncos.

You keep changing yor argument to justify your ranking, moron.

First, you said
Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9200235)
The power rankings aren't meant to be season-encompassing. They're rankings of how each team is playing right now. The people coming up with them don't really care what happened 11 weeks ago, they care what happened this week.


Then you said this when I asked why GB isn't ranked ahead of the Texans
Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9200257)
Because the Texans still only lost one of their last 7 games. Is this really that hard to grasp? Recent results matter more to these lists, but that doesn't mean just the last game.


Which one is it? D the rankings only look at recent results, or are they skewed to look at more recent results with higher priority? Because you contradict yourself with those two quotes.

MagicHef 12-11-2012 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorter (Post 9200426)
You keep changing yor argument to justify your ranking, moron.

First, you said


Then you said this when I asked why GB isn't ranked ahead of the Texans


Which one is it? D the rankings only look at recent results, or are they skewed to look at more recent results with higher priority? Because you contradict yourself with those two quotes.

No, I'm not contradicting myself. Point out where I used the word "only," like you claim I did.

Sorter 12-11-2012 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9200438)
No, I'm not contradicting myself. Point out where I used the word "only," like you claim I did.

JFC. Your first quote says that "The people coming up with them don't really care what happened 11 weeks ago, they care what happened this week."

Your second one says that in fact, that past results do have some importance. This contradicts your first statement.

Mr. Flopnuts 12-11-2012 04:51 PM

As much as it pains me to see, Peyton Manning is doing what he always does. Denver is a legit SB contender. No big shocker. Thanks, Scooter!

MagicHef 12-11-2012 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorter (Post 9200453)
JFC. Your first quote says that "The people coming up with them don't really care what happened 11 weeks ago, they care what happened this week."

Your second one says that in fact, that past results do have some importance. This contradicts your first statement.

Assigning exclusivity to a statement that doesn't imply such, much less state it explicitly, is poor reading practice.

BigMeatballDave 12-11-2012 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9200301)
?

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that you hate the Broncos.

LMAO

Well, no shit.

This IS a Chiefs board, dumbass.

Ugly Duck 12-11-2012 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9200087)
The Broncos are playing better than they were in weeks 2 and 3, and the Falcon and Texans are both playing significantly worse.

It's not really that complicated.

Don't mean to complicate undeniable Bronco success, but we should note that Denver's recent run has been against Oakland, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, San Diego & Carolina. Denver's recent opponents have an average record of 4-9. Small wonder the Broncos have been playing better.

And I agree.... there's a lot of Bronco hate on this board. Its unconscionable.

ClevelandBronco 12-11-2012 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ugly Duck (Post 9200961)
Don't mean to complicate undeniable Bronco success, but we should note that Denver's recent run has been against Oakland, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, San Diego & Carolina. Denver's recent opponents have an average record of 4-9. Small wonder the Broncos have been playing better.

And I agree.... there's a lot of Bronco hate on this board. Its unconscionable.

The Broncos really ought to join a division that includes at least one other professional football team.

BigMeatballDave 12-11-2012 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco (Post 9200992)
The Broncos really ought to join a division that includes at least one other professional football team.

Like the 2010 Broncos?

MagicHef 12-11-2012 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 9201051)
Like the 2010 Broncos?

2010 was the worst 16 game season the Broncos have ever had. 3 of the Chiefs past 5 seasons (and likely 4 of the last 6) have been as bad or worse. But, can you imagine if the Broncos hadn't been so bad that year? We wouldn't have Von!

Likewise, if the Chiefs hadn't been so bad in 2007, you wouldn't have... Dorsey.
Or, in 2008, you wouldn't have... Jackson?
Or in 2009... Berry.

This year, though!

Sorter 12-12-2012 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9201328)
2010 was the worst 16 game season the Broncos have ever had. 3 of the Chiefs past 5 seasons (and likely 4 of the last 6) have been as bad or worse. But, can you imagine if the Broncos hadn't been so bad that year? We wouldn't have Von!

Likewise, if the Chiefs hadn't been so bad in 2007, you wouldn't have... Dorsey.
Or, in 2008, you wouldn't have... Jackson?
Or in 2009... Berry.

This year, though!

NSFW possibly the best neg GIF of all time though.

Codered 12-12-2012 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9201328)
2010 was the worst 16 game season the Broncos have ever had. 3 of the Chiefs past 5 seasons (and likely 4 of the last 6) have been as bad or worse. But, can you imagine if the Broncos hadn't been so bad that year? We wouldn't have Von!

Likewise, if the Chiefs hadn't been so bad in 2007, you wouldn't have... Dorsey.
Or, in 2008, you wouldn't have... Jackson?
Or in 2009... Berry.

This year, though!

Ouch.

BigMeatballDave 12-12-2012 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9201328)
2010 was the worst 16 game season the Broncos have ever had. 3 of the Chiefs past 5 seasons (and likely 4 of the last 6) have been as bad or worse. But, can you imagine if the Broncos hadn't been so bad that year? We wouldn't have Von!

Likewise, if the Chiefs hadn't been so bad in 2007, you wouldn't have... Dorsey.
Or, in 2008, you wouldn't have... Jackson?
Or in 2009... Berry.

This year, though!

Even if you didn't have Miller, the donkeys would still be where they are at now. Peyton does what he does. He's the reason, not the rest of the stooges on your AIDS infested team.

Without Manning, you're 6-7, tops.

Enjoy breastfeeding your teenage kids.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.