King could have the Texans ranked 32nd, and I wouldn't give a damn. The fact is we are the ones headed to Baltimore for a game in the Divisional Round. We are going to be hearing a LOT of people dismiss us this week....it's pointless to get worked up over it. We know how good our team is, and hopefully they will show up on Sunday with the intention of proving it.
IDK how Atlanta is above us, they got pwned so bad. Denver I can understand more since they did beat a hobble Steelers team.
There's no logic to put Denver ahead of the Texans. They're two games worse than the Texans in W/L record (9-8 vs. 11-6) and finished the regular season on the same three-game losing streak. The Texans also have 5 wins over teams with winning records, compared to just 3 for Denver. Oh, and the mighty Pittsburgh team that Denver scraped by in overtime... the Texans already beat them, too. There's just zero case, other than a superficial love for the Tim Tebow story, to rank the Broncos ahead of the Texans. None whatsoever.
So did we, FYI, which makes the ranking even sillier. My guess is he'll get a ton of emails and whip out the "Iowa" line, ie on a neutral cornfield in Iowa, the Texans couldn't beat any of those three teams. Which is ridiculous. Additionally, did you notice Cincinnati's not ranked among his top 15? Nope. Is 6-10 Miami? Of course they are! Is Tennessee, who lost to Cincinnati and thus didn't make the playoffs? Yep. 8-8 and non-playoff teams in Philly, San Diego and Arizona (!) - of course! Seriously. He's a goofball. Shame he continues to draw a paycheck to spew such drivel.
If any of you have read Monday Morning QB this year, you'd be well aware of the fact that he has praised the Texans all season long. This ranking is odd for sure, and I definitely question it. However, to say that Kimg is a Texans hater is less than naive.
I see one post buried in the thread with that implication. I think most of us, including myself (the OP), are on the same page. King isn't a Texan hater, per se. He isn't out to get them. He's just a very lazy sportswriter who forms preconceived notions and stubbornly clings to them, refusing to watch the games with an open mind. The Texans just happen to be one of the teams he rushed to judgment about following the Leinart injury. I think most everyone knows that he's not out to get the Texans.
Who wouldnt rush out to judgment after a team's second string QB gets injured, only to be replaced by a 5th round rookie QB? I mean, there isnt anything wrong with dismissing a team when they have to rely on a 3rd stringer, a rookie, nonetheless. If Brady goes down, the Patriots are screwed with their 2nd string, third year QB. I dont think many people outside of New England would disagree with me. In any case, King has been very supportive this season of the Texans...his ranking today was very questionable, but he also praised Foster, Watt, and Turk...so I guess I just dont understand where he has officially become a Troll.
Whats the point of this power ranking if his method is to - NOT include an actual playoff team - have FIVE NON-playoff teams - 1/3 of the entire list - to have a "TIE" between a 9-7 team and a 6-10 team, whats the rationale behind that?? - Which makes his "Fine Fifteen" actually SIXTEEN teams? LOL
The only thing that bothers me is that when we win it's (in the media's eyes) what the other team did wrong rather than what we did right to win.
If we're not supposed to care about what the national media thinks, why is there a national media there to begin with? I, for one, would enjoy hearing the team I root for being discussed when I tune into a national program about the sport they are playing.
Indeed. I've always disliked the sportswriters who basically give opinions that fans would give. "Arian Foster's awesome. Just look at his YPC and yards gained". Yeah, no kidding. I can write that. I can look at box scores, see JJ Watt with a INT for a TD, and put him as the DPOW. It's okay if you're just writing a report for those who don't care to watch the game itself. But not if you want to pass yourself off as someone who actually knows anything. I much prefer people who actually look at line play, look at the routes receivers run, coverage, etc. Things that you actually have to know the game to talk about.
The problem is that if the Texans lose on Sunday (which as much as the fans in us would not believe to be able to happen), King and all the other 'pundits' can come back on air and say, "See, I was right. Just a house of cards after they lost Schaub." In the process wholly discounting how good this team has been in the games since he has gone down. As a Houston native I am rooting for the Texans. As a sports fan I am rooting for us to shut everyone up (no one will ever eat his pride and man up and apologize after). The good thing with football is that it seems to be the one sport where the underdog has a better shot because of it. After the biggest underdogs of the past ten years going into the Super Bowl (Pats against Rams; Giants against Pats) actually won it. The only problem is that the Super Bowl is played in a neutral field where we'll have the heavy task of taking on Baltimore who are undefeated at home. I hope the ref crew is good.
That's fine and good, when you don't have evidence to go on. I don't mind King for having that initial opinion when Leinart went down. Problem is, there's enough actual, on-field evidence of the Texans play with T.J. Yates to show that they're clearly superior to Atlanta and Denver, and he refuses to look at it. I'm not judging King based on whether he likes or dislikes the Texans. I'm judging him because he claims to be a reputable analyst, yet forms opinions that he's unwilling to change despite loads of evidence to the contrary. That's arrogance.
But the thing is, you've just described about 80% of national sportswriters. I suppose we have the internet to thank for that. Why bother to watch the games when you can just pull up the stats on your phone Sunday night?
