ESPN Power Rankings: Texans slip to #27

Discussion in 'Texans Talk' started by gtexan02, Sep 12, 2006.

  1. gtexan02

    gtexan02 Working?

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,785
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Location:
    Boston
  2. gtexan02

    gtexan02 Working?

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,785
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Location:
    Boston
    Here is an analysis of our strength of schedule according to the NFL power rankings:


    (Projected Win/Loss based on Ranking only)

    PHILADELPHIA EAGLES (11) - L
    @ Indianapolis Colts (2) - L
    WASHINGTON REDSKINS (20) - L
    MIAMI DOLPHINS (16) - L
    @ Dallas Cowboys (15) - L
    JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS (5) - L
    @ Tennessee Titans (29) - W
    @ New York Giants (14) - L
    @ Jacksonville Jaguars (5) - L
    BUFFALO BILLS (26) - L
    @ New York Jets (23) - L
    @ Oakland Raiders (31) - W
    TENNESSEE TITANS (29) - W
    @ New England Patriots (10) - L
    INDIANAPOLIS COLTS (2) - L
    CLEVELAND BROWNS (28) - W

    Our average opponent rank: 16.6
    Playoff teams (top 12): 6
    Top 10 teams: 5
    Middle 12 teams: 5
    Bottom 10 teams: 6

    Projected Record (assuming higher ranked teams win) = 4-12-0
     
  3. Rightnow

    Rightnow Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    11
    Don't worry, after we lose this week we will be one of the botton four. :D

    The list is accurate. Even though we lost, the Browns, Titans, 49er's, Raiders and Packers are worse. Even if we lose this week and they all win we may not make 32. The Packers and Raiders truly are terrible this year.
     
  4. Second Honeymoon

    Second Honeymoon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,330
    Likes Received:
    437
    Location:
    The Woodlands, Texas
    What is up with the ESPN inferiority complex around here? Contrary to popular belief, ESPN does not hate Houston or have some sort of anti-Houston agenda. When you lose you drop in ranks, makes sense huh? There were teams below us that looked better and some that won. So please do us all a favor and stop blaming ESPN and whining that your pee pee hurts. It's not ESPN's fault that our FO have made the decisions that they have made....I am sure it's ESPN's fault that the Astros and Rockets stunk this year too, huh?

    Win = move up in rankings
    Lose = move down in rankings

    its pretty damn simple....and not the fault of the *adopts southern drawl* 'liberal east coast yankee jew run media'....

    doug from the woodlands
     
  5. Tx'nFanLostInSkinCountry

    Tx'nFanLostInSkinCountry Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    11
    I agree it is interesting that they mention the running back position and Kubiak then no mention of ...... you know who. Some kid NO took with the second pick. (realy cant beleive they let that one slide editor must have be in the can.)
     
  6. gtexan02

    gtexan02 Working?

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,785
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Location:
    Boston

    Holy goodness, get off your horse already. I wasn't saying that ESPN hates us, I was saying that ESPN doesn't give a ******* about us (and maybe rightly so, we were 2-14 last year). Because they don't care about us, they ALWAYS post about our OL or the MW vs. RB debate, and I for one was surprised they didn't do that in the power rankings. Thats all I was saying. if you'd read my other post, I for one think ESPN was RIGHT in only focusing on our OL all offseason (I used to htink they were ignorant of our changes, but I guess not) since we still gave up 5 sacks in game 1.

    I'm so sick of this talking down to other poster crap, that now you have me whining about you whining about people whining! Quit demeaning other posters on this board or go to the Colts MB
     
  7. Titan "Tack" Fan

    Titan "Tack" Fan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,514
    Likes Received:
    49
    Location:
    Ca$hville
    What I don't like about the list is they are still using last year to rank the teams. Seattle should be like #15 after the way they played, the Ravens should be top 3.....you get my point
     
  8. LORK 88

    LORK 88 Wreck'em Ŧech!

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    196
    Location:
    Texas Tech
    Agreed, but thats the way its always been. Thats why when ESPN and all the other mainstream football outlets do a 2006 preview, its better known as a 2005 review. With that said, we could be afew spots higher, but we got to earn it until then.
     
  9. Mysteryhunt

    Mysteryhunt Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    296
    Likes Received:
    4
    they picked the giants to lose to the eagles too, giving them the same 0-2 as we probably will have and the giants are much better than us. so we shouldnt feel bad if we take a few early season losses right?
     
  10. painekiller

    painekiller Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    2,067
    Likes Received:
    124
    Location:
    On the West Belt
    Hey I would be happy with the 6th pick in the 2007 draft. I really would.
     
  11. DeclanJr

    DeclanJr Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hate to talk about the draft this early in the season, there is still a lot more football to be played. However, I think we will definately be in the running for a high draft pick, but I do see a few more W's on the schedule that are not projected based on our rankings (the Cowboys). I'm just happy the team came out and engineered a scoring drive in the first quarter and led the Eagles for as long as they did. Until Mario has a sack or two and we win a ballgame, we are going to stay in the cellar (by ESPN standards). That's just what I think...
     

Share This Page