Skip to content

Week 10 power rankings

Colin Kaepernick, Jonathan Goodwin AP

1. Texans (six first-place votes):  Jay Cutler ran into Tim Dobbins the same way Joe Theismann ran into Lawrence Taylor.

2. Falcons:  The Saints helped the Falcons get some national media attention.

3. Ravens:  They may need some of those 55 points over the next three games, two of which come against the Steelers.

4. 49ers:  Colin Kaepernick has shown he’s caepable of helping this team win.  (Yes, that was laeme.)

5. Packers:  How many injuries to offensive players can they endure?  As many that don’t happen to Aaron Rodgers.

6. Bears:  The Superfans are bracing for a second annual Superslide.

7. Patriots:  If this team keeps blowing fourth-quarter leads in the regular season, it may not have to worry about blowing another fourth-quarter lead in the Super Bowl.

8. Broncos:  If Trindon Holliday ever drops the ball before crossing the goal line again, Peyton Manning will put it in a place where it will never fall out.

9. Steelers:  By the end of the week, Ben Roethlisberger will claim that doctors thought about amputating his arm.

10. Colts:  That five-day neckbeard makes Andrew Luck look like Wooly Willy.

11. Giants:  Eli Manning doesn’t have a tired arm; his arm is in a coma.

12. Seahawks:  That Week Three replacement-ref win could end up hurting the Vikings more than it hurts the Packers.

13. Vikings:  The rest of the schedule will hurt the Vikings a lot more than that.

14. Buccaneers:  If this team played in a Super Bowl hosted at Raymond James Stadium, the game still may not sell out.

15. Saints:  Before penciling this team in as the No. 6 seed, look at the rest of the schedule.

16. Bengals:  Beating the defending Super Bowl champs could be the closest thing this team comes to the playoffs.

17. Lions:  Calvin Johnson played well on an injured knee, unless he misused the term “injured knee.”

18. Rams:  With the Rams having a 2-0-1 record in the division and a 1-5 mark out of it, the NFC West isn’t as good as we think it is.

19. Chargers:  Maybe Norv was simply preparing for his next career as a media critic.  Which could be launching by Christmas.

20. Titans:  Maybe Bud Adams should threaten to fire everyone more often.

21. Cowboys:  Don’t look now, but this team could still climb back into the NFC East race.  Just in time for the Giants to win it late.

22. Dolphins:  On Sunday against the Titans, the Dolphins were who we thought they are.

23. Cardinals:  The season could hinge on their ability to win in Atlanta.  If so, there goes the season.

24. Redskins:  With Mike Vick likely out, the “evaluation” of the defense could go a lot better on Sunday.

25. Panthers:  Upon hearing the news that L.A. is interested in the Panthers, some said, “Wait, I thought Los Angeles wanted an NFL team?”

26. Bills:  G.M. Buddy Nix says coach Chan Gailey is safe.  But who said Nix is safe?

27. Eagles:  Mike Vick’s concussion will heal as soon as Nick Foles gets one.

28. Jets:  The vote of confidence from Woody Johnson should be coming any day now.

29. Raiders:  It looked like the Raiders were willing to take a step back now in the hopes of taking multiple steps forward in the future.  It looks like they decided to take multiple steps back.

30. Browns:  Yes, the players want to change their uniforms; they want to wear the uniforms of other teams.

31. Jaguars:  If Shad Khan cleans house, he may be paying more money to former employees than he’s paying to his players.

32. Chiefs:  A moral victory finally comes during an inherently immoral season.

Permalink 73 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Features, Top Stories
73 Responses to “Week 10 power rankings”
  1. thebrettman says: Nov 13, 2012 10:00 AM

    Colts at 10?

  2. spellingcops says: Nov 13, 2012 10:03 AM

    Falcons too high, as they have been #1 simply for their record. Now that they’ve been beat, look at their whole body of work. 9ers too high. The 4th best team in the NFL doesn’t play to a draw against the Rams. Although I’ll admit, the Rams are going to be a serious contender in the near future, and are nothing to look over now.

  3. southpaw2k says: Nov 13, 2012 10:06 AM

    Umm…wow. So the Ravens vaulted from #9 last week to #3? Even I think that’s a little high.

    Then again, they are still the #2 team in the AFC.

  4. pdillon1 says: Nov 13, 2012 10:08 AM

    The Bears lost 13-6 to supposedly the league’s best team with a backup for the second half. At worst these two teams played to a stalemate in a game someone had to win. Bears should be #2

  5. jhein23 says: Nov 13, 2012 10:08 AM

    If Aaron Rodgers matches his TD total of last year and the Packers win the tough NFC North again with all these offensive injuries how is he not a top MVP candidate?

  6. hehateme2 says: Nov 13, 2012 10:08 AM

    Once again your thinking is confusing. The Dolphins have been competitive all season (even during 3 quarters against the Texans.) They have a lot of work to do but this is a young team with a rookie head coach, coaching staff and QB.

    So, during their unusual game on Sunday “ they were who we thought they were?” Makes no sense.

  7. briandorry55 says: Nov 13, 2012 10:10 AM

    Hey remember when the Bucs trounced the Vikings in their house on a short week? Yeah…I do. The Bucs would beat that team 4 out of 5 times, nice rankings.

  8. cacaw420 says: Nov 13, 2012 10:12 AM

    a seven spot jump for the Ravens this week? 10 to 3? seven spots just proves that you didn’t have them ranked accurately coming into this week, and are again succumbing to knee-jerk reactions from a single game. it kills me how fickle these things are.

  9. buffalose says: Nov 13, 2012 10:13 AM

    Sounds silly but the bills are too low, they beat Arizona. And played Houston and New England very hard, after a brutal month and a half. I know they aren’t great but seem to be getting better

  10. bucthat says: Nov 13, 2012 10:13 AM

    seriously? do u hate tampa that much that they win and ur comment is still negative? little jealous that their not losing games u keep picking them to.

  11. dutzer36 says: Nov 13, 2012 10:14 AM

    27. Eagles:  Mike Vick’s concussion will heal as soon as Nick Foles gets one.
    Exactly what I was thinking when he got injured I mean they were hoping he would get injured for a few weeks now so that way they won’t have to bench him and would need a exuse and they probably regretted getting him that Chest protecter

  12. wilddeuce03 says: Nov 13, 2012 10:20 AM

    And once again you feel the need to take a shot at the Browns. Yes, their record sucks but they are still set up pretty well right now with a lot of young talent and have played better than their record shows. Yes, you are what your record is but with a better coach this team would at least be at .500 right now.

  13. notinjuschillin says: Nov 13, 2012 10:21 AM

    Giants at 11? yes..it’s all according to plan.
    Never let them see you coming…then in the playoffs…punch them in the mouth.

  14. computojon says: Nov 13, 2012 10:22 AM

    “Colin Kaepernick has shown he’s caepable of helping this team win.”

    Actually, he has shown he’s capable of helping this team tie.

  15. trefkennedy says: Nov 13, 2012 10:32 AM

    Well at the very least we got a win TeamCowboys

  16. daytonaken says: Nov 13, 2012 10:36 AM

    Now that’s funny. Ben will play–GREAT THEATER

    9. Steelers: By the end of the week, Ben Roethlisberger will claim that doctors thought about amputating his arm.

  17. grizzlott says: Nov 13, 2012 10:51 AM

    As a Bears fan, I knew I should have stopped reading this article as soon as I saw Florio’s name at the top.

    Superslide? Their QB missed one half of one game and season’s over? I wish I could understand your bias a little more.

    My personal guess is that your beloved Jets are sub-par yet again, and you’re looking for an outlet for your anger. I have some advice, just give up.

    Even with Jesus Christ as your back-up QB, your team continues to suck. Find a better outlet for your anger instead of trying to pick on one of the best teams in the league.

  18. thejabronisayz says: Nov 13, 2012 11:04 AM

    I don’t necessarily agree with your notion that the NFC West isn’t as good as you all think it is because the Rams record outside the division is 1-5. Besides the shellacking they received by the Patriots (which was on a neutral field, and not at the Dome, which would have been different), the Rams have been competitive in every game. In their five losses:

    1. A last second defeat at Detroit in Week 1, and you’re forgetting that the clock malfunctioned in that game which one may argue cost them the game.

    2. A loss at Chicago, but the Rams were within a touchdown and driving for the tie when Bradford threw the pick six.

    3. A loss in Miami by 3 points in which Legatron missed his first 3 field goals of the season.

    4. A loss to the Packers where the Rams were again within a touchdown in the fourth quarter.

    5. The horrendous loss to the Patriots.

    6. A game in San Fran where they should have won. That obviously doesn’t excuse their penalties and boneheaded mistakes, but they should have won.

    Therefore, I make the argument that the Rams are an underachieving 3-5-1 team that could have a much better record had things in Miami and Detroit gone differently.

  19. seahawks4alltime says: Nov 13, 2012 11:07 AM

    That week three game against the Packers turned out just how it should have. The Seahawks defense stifled the Packers offense all game long and the Seahawks have the W. It is what it is. Get over. If the Seahawks had lost had lost, I would be over it (nothin new there). Your team lost, get over it.

  20. liner1900 says: Nov 13, 2012 11:12 AM

    Vikings one ahead of the Bucs? Bucs beat the Vikings in Minn.

  21. 69finfan says: Nov 13, 2012 11:15 AM

    I have no problem with the Dolphins dropping to #22 after the way they played Sunday, worst home loss since 1968. They might not have beaten some good HS teams that day. But, let’s see how they respond against the Bills Thursday night.

  22. eddardofthehousestark says: Nov 13, 2012 11:18 AM

    In regards to the Rams, @thejabronisayz states,

    “A game in San Fran where they should have won. That obviously doesn’t excuse their penalties and boneheaded mistakes, but they should have won.”

    I don’t know that it’s necessarily “should” have won, but more like they “could” have won. Really, neither team deserved to win that game, and the Rams very easily “could” or “should?” have lost as well. Or did you not see the Akers 41 yard missed field goal in overtime? The Rams had a 14-0 league at one point, played against a backup quarterback for most of the game, and still could not come away with a victory.

  23. gilgafresh says: Nov 13, 2012 11:21 AM

    You have the Chiefs too high.

  24. tbd3 says: Nov 13, 2012 11:24 AM

    I don’t usually comment on power rankings because I know everyone just complains about how bad they are – but the Falcons at number two? The Bears at number six? I think that if you switch those two, these rankings are significantly more accurate. Let’s face it: the Falcons, besides the Eagles game, have been pretty underwhelming ever since week four. They narrowly beat the Panthers, Redskins, Raiders, and Cowboys. All of those games were decided by seven points or less (and not against top-tier teams, either). They are not playing like the second best team in football, despite what their record says. But, hey, I would have said the same thing about the Pats when they were winning ugly game after ugly game during their Super Bowl years.

    Having said that, I would have a hard time putting together power rankings this week. The top is muddled. The Texans are clearly number one. Beyond that? The Falcons have a great record, but they have achieved it through underwhelming wins against poor teams. The 49ers and Bears both have injured quarterbacks. The Ravens, and especially Joe Flacco, are up and down. The Packers struggled against the Jaguars just two weeks ago and are severely beat up. The Patriots can’t hold a lead. The Steelers just went to OT against a team that hasn’t held a lead in regulation yet this season. Is this parity or what?

  25. eaglesfanalways says: Nov 13, 2012 11:26 AM

    Eagles are #27 (and falling)…I sit in the Linc with more of the opposing team’s fans than Eagles fans nowadays. I like Foles, but he’s not this team’s answer.

  26. thetokyosandblaster says: Nov 13, 2012 11:29 AM

    pdillon1 says:
    Nov 13, 2012 10:08 AM
    The Bears lost 13-6 to supposedly the league’s best team with a backup for the second half. At worst these two teams played to a stalemate in a game someone had to win. Bears should be #2

    Actually, they’re ranked too high. The texans came in and won in Chicago. Every good team the bears have played has beaten them. If cutler misses more than one game, they may not even make the playoffs, which would rank them around 13 or 14.

    These rankings look right to me.

  27. randyschwimmer7 says: Nov 13, 2012 11:30 AM

    25. Panthers: Upon hearing the news that L.A. is interested in the Panthers, some said, “Wait, I thought Los Angeles wanted an NFL team?”

    ZIIIINNNNNNGGGGG! That was pretty good. The Panthers looked dismal. The best part was, sCam Newton said that “The Panther are going to CRUSH the Broncos”. I think it’s time to put sCam on the bench for a while. He is terrible.

  28. mrbullgator says: Nov 13, 2012 11:33 AM

    So all you could talk about with the bucs is the game not selling out??? Thanks for all the thought and effort put into these rankings. We beat the vikings yet we are ranked worst than them???

  29. olcap says: Nov 13, 2012 11:34 AM

    Steelers will soon be at the bottom of your list, without the services of their QB.

    Take it to the bank.

  30. rams1999 says: Nov 13, 2012 11:39 AM

    He says the nfc west isnt that good yet the whole division is in top 18…makes sense.

  31. trollhammer20 says: Nov 13, 2012 11:40 AM

    18. Rams: With the Rams having a 2-0-1 record in the division and a 1-5 mark out of it, the NFC West isn’t as good as we think it is.
    __________________________

    And with the Seahawks 0-3 inside the division and 6-1 outside it, maybe it’s better than you think it is.

  32. grendelg says: Nov 13, 2012 11:44 AM

    I’m a Falcons fan but it’s hard to argue that they’re the 2nd best team in football. I think the Texans are clearly #1 right now. The thing is, it’s hard to argue that any of the other teams are better than the Falcons, too. I agree with tbd3, the top is a muddle. On any given Sunday any of the top 10 teams could beat any of the others and I’d probably just take the home team. That’s what makes the Bears loss bad for their ranking, because they WERE the home team and if you’re around as good as the opposing team you should win at home.

  33. ihaterogergoodell says: Nov 13, 2012 11:45 AM

    @thetokyosandblaster

    I agree, and that’s coming from a Bears fan. They desperately need Cutler back to even be capable of winning. I feel they have been placed to high the past few weeks… You can’t always count on the D to bail you out!

  34. specialagentjohnnyutah says: Nov 13, 2012 11:45 AM

    Seriously? It’s week 11 and the only comment you have about the #12 Seahawks is still about the Packers game 2 months ago.

    Let it go, some are holding this thing over the Seahawks head all season like they made the call and ran the replay booth. If the roles were reversed I’m guessing the Pack would’nt be giving the win back either.

  35. gnarlswoodson says: Nov 13, 2012 11:46 AM

    I cant believe there are still some Bears fans that dont get the picture yet. So, allow me. If your defense doesnt score you 2 TDs a game, which they wont against playoff teams, you dont win. Simple as that. Pretty sure in that Titans masterpiece 3 of the offensive TDs you guys had all you had to do was go like 15 yards, am I wrong about that? Nope. Defense wins championships, but Offense gets you there, and Bands a make her dance.

  36. ezwriter69 says: Nov 13, 2012 11:47 AM

    Jason Campbell was gawd awful… if Cutler is out the Bears are toast… Campbell was worse than Caleb Hanie, and I didn’t think that was possible. No Cutler, no chance.

  37. fireeyes111 says: Nov 13, 2012 11:48 AM

    Shouldn’t the Patriots be lower than #7 after coming one play away from blowing multiple 14-point leads at home against the team you have ranked #26?

  38. RUAHORNH8R says: Nov 13, 2012 11:52 AM

    The bucs would beat the Vikings 4 of 5 games?? Yeah, no chance… Their D didn’t show up for few weeks, but they righted the ship this past week…. Bottom line is my Vikings have exceeded my expectations already, every win going forward is gravy. They are young & developing. Once we acquire a big #1 difference maker, and tweak our D, this team will win for years…

  39. wrathofgodzilla says: Nov 13, 2012 11:52 AM

    The Steelers are by far the most overrated team on this list. Are you kidding me?! They barely pulled one out at home against the Chiefs. And I don’t want to hear about the Steelers having their second string QB in because the Chiefs had their second string in the entire game.

  40. crush22 says: Nov 13, 2012 12:00 PM

    thebrettman says:
    Nov 13, 2012 10:00 AM
    Colts at 10?

    ______________________________

    I agree!
    They should be at 8.

  41. dvdman123 says: Nov 13, 2012 12:04 PM

    Come on now Bucs ahead of the Vikings?

  42. revischrist16 says: Nov 13, 2012 12:06 PM

    jets at 28!?!?

    overated

    time to clean house

  43. shlort says: Nov 13, 2012 12:08 PM

    Any team can beat any team on any given week.

    The rankings are a pretty fair indicator of where teams stand. It is basically based on consistency and wins. Inconsistent teams tend to lose more often, hence their place in the rankings.

    I do like the theory behind some folks’ arguments though. OK.. The eagles beat the Ravens in week 2, should the Eagles be ranked where the Ravens are? The Packers beat the Texans a few weeks back, should GB be number 1? No and No. It is about the Teams and where they stand now based on their records and how they are playing week in and week out. It isnt a conspiracy against your team…lol.

  44. briandorry55 says: Nov 13, 2012 12:10 PM

    “RUAHORNH8R says:
    Nov 13, 2012 11:52 AM

    Bottom line is my Vikings have exceeded my expectations already, every win going forward is gravy. They are young & developing. Once we acquire a big #1 difference maker, and tweak our D, this team will win for years…”

    ————————————————–

    Bears twice, Packers twice, @ Houston, and @ St. Louis…

    That doesn’t taste like gravy to me…tastes like you’ll be lucky if you get two wins out of those last six…tastes like the powder you use to make instant gravy, before you mix it with water.

  45. starderup says: Nov 13, 2012 12:10 PM

    I insist that you only rated one team correctly, and I will not give you the satisfaction of knowing which one.

  46. blackqbwhiterb says: Nov 13, 2012 12:11 PM

    The perfect elixir for what ails the Eagles, Deangelo Hall and Josh Wilson are coming to town…The Redskins should beat the Eagles, like they should have beaten the Panthers…In games like this, the Redskins have consistently come up short the last 15 years…..

    Someone please tell Kyle Shanahan to call plays from upstairs, where he can see what’s happening, not down on the sidelines…Then maybe on 3rd and 9, he’ll have RG3 throw the ball, not Josh Morgan….idiot

  47. geniusfan says: Nov 13, 2012 12:25 PM

    As a Patriots fan I’m happy this is one of those years when nobody really believes in them. Keep saying the defense stinks, Brady chokes in the 4th quarter and when January comes around the Patriots will be a factor as always.

    Last year was similar nobody really thought that team would win a playoff game with that defense never mind coming a play away from winning the Super Bowl. In 2010 people were pretty much coronating the Pats and Brady and then the Jets beat them.

    As the Giants have shown it really doesn’t matter how a team is playing until December and January.

  48. cball77 says: Nov 13, 2012 12:36 PM

    Mike, I usually find your comments witty, but that comment on the Seahawks at 12 was just lame. You can do better.

  49. violentbynature says: Nov 13, 2012 12:45 PM

    You, based on the Rams, try to paint the whole NFC West as being bad and bad outside of the division. Look at the numbers before making yourself look ignorant.

    Non-Division Record:
    Seattle 6-1
    S.F. 4-2
    Arz 3-3

  50. marty2020 says: Nov 13, 2012 12:56 PM

    As a Jags fan, who watches all the Jags games, I have to say, I find it very hard to believe there is an NFL team worse than we are. We should be # 32.

  51. steverolley says: Nov 13, 2012 12:56 PM

    Actually I’m pretty sure that losing to Seattle in week 9 will hurt the Vikings more than a week 3 game they weren’t involved in.

  52. htowntexan says: Nov 13, 2012 1:13 PM

    broncos are too low. they should be top 3.

  53. west4567 says: Nov 13, 2012 1:15 PM

    I’m a Texans fan, and think they shouldn’t be ranked ahead of Atlanta. Falcons lost a close one on the road to a division rival. Texans loss: screwed the pooch in prime time at home, when they should have been ready for the Packers, and the Texans looked like not-much. Houston’s better balanced, but Atlanta has repeatedly shown the ability to finish great in close games, something Houston hasn’t done.

  54. sixjak says: Nov 13, 2012 1:37 PM

    trollhammer20 says:
    Nov 13, 2012 11:40 AM
    18. Rams: With the Rams having a 2-0-1 record in the division and a 1-5 mark out of it, the NFC West isn’t as good as we think it is.
    __________________________

    And with the Seahawks 0-3 inside the division and 6-1 outside it, maybe it’s better than you think it is.

    ______________

    Wait. Are you making a good point here? Yes.

  55. cow395 says: Nov 13, 2012 1:40 PM

    my eagles suck, its so sad……

  56. hehateme2 says: Nov 13, 2012 1:54 PM

    I think we all agree, you have the jests ranked way too high!

  57. frankiefiveangels says: Nov 13, 2012 2:09 PM

    Most NFL “experts” says the NFC is significantly better than the AFC. I know this is one writers opinion but look at these power rankings. The top team is from the AFC, 2 of the top 3 and 6 of the top 10 are AFC teams. Does being better in the middle and at the bottom mean the NFC is better(inter conference records not withstanding)
    ?

  58. contraisloosebuthole says: Nov 13, 2012 2:11 PM

    Putting any AFC team in the top five is laughable. The real Superbowl will be the NFC championship.

  59. specialagentjohnnyutah says: Nov 13, 2012 2:15 PM

    steverolley says:
    Nov 13, 2012 12:56 PM
    Actually I’m pretty sure that losing to Seattle in week 9 will hurt the Vikings more than a week 3 game they weren’t involved in.

    ——————

    Well said. What does it matter when and where the Sea win came from, if Min is a game back then they are a game back, that’s on them not two other teams. If they fall short then they should have handled the head to head.

  60. brasho says: Nov 13, 2012 2:20 PM

    So Vikings are one spot ahead of Bucs despite the Bucs recently crushing the Vikings in Minnesota AND riding a 3 game win streak (and 4 out of 5)?

  61. ilovefoolsball says: Nov 13, 2012 2:56 PM

    There is nothing sacred this season except the Texans at this point.
    San Fran couldn’t beat the Rams at home and the coachless 0-4 starting Saints defeated the undefeated Falcons

  62. dlmcc1010 says: Nov 13, 2012 3:09 PM

    Jets are ranked too high and im actually a Jets fan. I dont see one good thing we do on offense or defense. Colts at #10 seems to be a stretch

  63. larryboodry says: Nov 13, 2012 3:21 PM

    I am not dreading a second straight ‘superslide’ from the Bears, but if Cutler misses any significant time – and Campbell doesn’t step up – then yeah, they’ll be lucky to win ten games.

  64. larryboodry says: Nov 13, 2012 3:23 PM

    Seven games left – with Cutler, Bears could finish 5-2, without him, 2-5.

  65. marima07 says: Nov 13, 2012 4:23 PM

    Patriots didn’t blow a fourth quarter lead last Sunday. The scored first in the first quarter and never trailed in the game.

  66. spicymudbugs says: Nov 13, 2012 4:34 PM

    2. Falcons: The Saints helped the Falcons get some national media attention.

    2 is also the Over/Under on how many points the Falcons will score in the playoffs

  67. jprcox says: Nov 13, 2012 4:43 PM

    Very confused how you place Seattle down at 12 when you know they could beat most teams ahead of them, and have beat 2. Not sure what its going to take for people to realize how good Seattle is.

  68. tonyarnold2 says: Nov 13, 2012 5:11 PM

    Things look great for the Ravens, even if it’s mainly on offense. The bye week seemed like a good time for the Ravens to get comfortable without Ray Lewis and Lardarius Webb, and we looked incredible against the Raiders. If we put up 30 points against the Steelers on Sunday, we come out with a win along with an 8-2 record and a seat atop the AFC North.

  69. peavey2 says: Nov 13, 2012 5:29 PM

    liner1900says:
    Nov 13, 2012 11:12 AM
    Vikings one ahead of the Bucs? Bucs beat the Vikings in Minn.

    Yeah, and the Vikings beat the 49’ers.

    So what.

  70. ohiobears says: Nov 13, 2012 7:01 PM

    How are the Jets ranked so high?

  71. 8to80texansblog says: Nov 14, 2012 12:20 PM

    west4567 says:
    Nov 13, 2012 1:15 PM
    I’m a Texans fan, and think they shouldn’t be ranked ahead of Atlanta. Falcons lost a close one on the road to a division rival. Texans loss: screwed the pooch in prime time at home, when they should have been ready for the Packers, and the Texans looked like not-much. Houston’s better balanced, but Atlanta has repeatedly shown the ability to finish great in close games, something Houston hasn’t done
    ———————————————

    It’s hard to show you can win close games when you win by 20 every week. I actually thought the Bears game was the best win of the season. It was a tough game, in the rain, on the road, against arguably the best defense in the league and we were able to eek out a close victory on the back of our defense and running game. The fact that Atlanta has won comeback victories against sub par opponents just tells me they are better than their weak schedule. I never felt that ATL was a 16-0 or 15-1 type team.

    I agree with another Texans fan that Denver should be higher. I very much don’t want to see Denver in the playoffs.

  72. trollaikman8 says: Nov 14, 2012 2:40 PM

    Yeah, the Chargers/Buccs/Titans and Lions are all better than the Dallas Cowboys.

  73. giantsfanbuteaglesownussoimaeaglesfan says: Nov 14, 2012 4:38 PM

    Why are we ranked so high? Please move the Giants down 10 spots, at least 10 maybe 15. Eagles own us.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!