1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

CBS Sports - Ultimate Power Rankings: Bring on the hate mail

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by LombardiChick, Feb 11, 2011.

  1. LombardiChick

    LombardiChick Win or lose, I love this team.

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,033
    Ratings:
    +682
    Hat tip goes to SwizzleBizzle on the ESPN Packer board:

    Ultimate Power Rankings: Bring on the hate mail

    For those of you who pick me apart each week for my CBSSports.com Power Rankings, I give you the chance for your biggest rip moments ever:

    The Ultimate Power Rankings.

    What, you say? Here's the deal. We've decided to rank the NFL's teams 1-32 based on how they stack up as a franchise -- both now and in history.

    There are several factors that I used. Among them are winning over the years -- especially in the Super Bowl era -- ownership, fan base, tradition and overall leadership of the franchise in its current state.

    This is not a scientific study, but one based on some of those criteria and my opinion.

    Guess where he has the Packers.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  2. Mr. StyleZ

    Mr. StyleZ Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Ratings:
    +376
    His top 5 are also my top 5.. Packers, Bears, Steelers, Giants, and Cowboys. I thought Oakland may be a tad low, and the Browns too low, but not much else to complain about..
     
  3. GWheels

    GWheels Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2011
    Messages:
    418
    Ratings:
    +208
    I'd take out the Bears and Cowboys and replace them with the Saints and Pats.
     
  4. Eis Bowl

    Eis Bowl Touchdown Artist

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Messages:
    134
    Ratings:
    +18
    Ehh. I guess I could agree with the rankings pretty much. I don't know about the Steelers being "America's Team" though.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. JBlood

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,155
    Ratings:
    +1,312
    I like no. 1--obviously. The Bears are no. 2 (even though their fans are no. 31).

    There's no way no. 32 belongs to anyone except your Minnesota Vikings. 0 for 50 deserves its rightful place in history.
     
  6. Green_Bay_Packers

    Green_Bay_Packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Messages:
    5,640
    Ratings:
    +113
    Vikings too high!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. BigBayBlues

    BigBayBlues Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    98
    Ratings:
    +34
    No arguments here from me....ok....just one....The Patriots should not be ahead of the 49ers if this is an "all-time" rankings list. Yea the Patiots have had more recent success, but I definitely think the 9ers are a more storied franchise.

    Edit: Ok just looked further down the list. Vikings above a franchise like the Bills?!?!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. IluvGB

    IluvGB I <3 Packers!!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Messages:
    4,368
    Ratings:
    +850
    I agree...waaaaaay too high!!!
     
  9. IluvGB

    IluvGB I <3 Packers!!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Messages:
    4,368
    Ratings:
    +850
    Is SwizzleBizzle aka Pete Prisco??

    Or did he/she a comment in the comment section?? ( I stopped looking for the name at page 3!)
     
  10. lambeaulambo

    lambeaulambo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Messages:
    628
    Ratings:
    +206
    wait a minute - the ravens and buccaneers both won a super bowl and they are too low as well. they should be with the saints. bills and vikes should be way down there.

    As far as taking out Dallas and Chicago?? There is NO WAY you replace them w NE and NO. The bears have too many titles, and the cowboys WERE a force in the 70's and 90's.



    the ultimate rankings list grid on the left side of the page is exactly how they should be ordered. anyone without goes to the bottom.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Powarun

    Powarun Big Bay Blues fan

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,048
    Ratings:
    +420
    Lions, Browns, and Bills are too low. Patriots, Vikings, and Eagles are too high.

    ONly one I think I have to defend is the Patriots, they may be a force of reckoning now, but they also have a few SB losses.
     
  12. TheSnowPlow

    TheSnowPlow Driving Don Shula Crazy

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    682
    Ratings:
    +491
    • Like Like x 1
  13. JJP41

    JJP41 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    938
    Ratings:
    +215
    The Pats above the Niners???

    What are they smoking at CBS?

    I want some of that stuff.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Murgen

    Murgen MechaPackzilla

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    3,288
    Ratings:
    +585
    The sperm heads ahead of teams that won Championships!! Huh?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. fettpett

    fettpett Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    928
    Ratings:
    +217
    Lions are ranked way to low...even if they haven't won a Championship since 1957, they have still won more than the Vikqueens have
     
  16. LombardiChick

    LombardiChick Win or lose, I love this team.

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,033
    Ratings:
    +682
    Oh! Sorry. SwizzleBizzle is just a guy who posts on the ESPN board, and that's where I found this...didn't want to take credit for finding it without him.
     
  17. GWheels

    GWheels Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2011
    Messages:
    418
    Ratings:
    +208
    I misread the thread as all time rankings. No I wouldn't take the Bears and Cowboys out.
     
  18. LombardiChick

    LombardiChick Win or lose, I love this team.

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,033
    Ratings:
    +682
    I think a relatively young franchise coming in at sixth out of thirty-two is pretty darned good. :hug:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,975
    Ratings:
    +2,226
    The top half is fine. It gets difficult to figure out who sucks the most for the bottom half.

    Biggest issue is probably the Raiders. They suck now, but they have a very loyal fan base and were dominant a few times.
     
  20. LombardiChick

    LombardiChick Win or lose, I love this team.

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,033
    Ratings:
    +682
    Yeah, that's absurd. I shudder when I read stuff like that. I'm an American, and people like this don't get to pick my team for me.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  21. fettpett

    fettpett Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    928
    Ratings:
    +217
    screw that, ESPN had a Sports Nations poll, Packers won "America's Team" vote by like 5% over the Steelers and Cowfails
     
  22. greenandgold

    greenandgold I'm Dirty Hairy Callahan

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2010
    Messages:
    1,776
    Ratings:
    +473
    Now, now. The BiQueens DID get to 4 Superbowls, now.

    Of course their trophy case still has zero Lomabardis. :viksux:
     
  23. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,595
    Ratings:
    +1,005
    Ok, I'm not going to say who is to high or to low. But I would like to point out a few things about his list. First. He uses all the NFL championships up until 1965 and then switches to the Super Bowl, which may be fine, but it takes away the Championships away from the AFL teams from 1960 - 1965 while counting the Championships of the teams that were in the NFL. I think that's a bit unfair to those teams. At the same time he is using the win - loss records of those teams in his win - loss total. So essentially he's saying I'll use you win/loss totals from your league, the AFL, but screw your championships, they don't count.

    As well as teams that have been to more than one Super Bowl and lost are more likely to be lower on the list than those that have only been once. San Diego has been to the Super Bowl once and lost, has a worse win/loss record than the Vikings, and only slightly better than the Bills win/loss record yet are ranked much higher. Teams also are rated higher due to what have you done lately. New England's w/l record prior to Parcells taking over is a wonderful .455. Since than it's .642. So for their first 32 years they sucked. Same for the Jets, since 1960 they have put back to back winning seasons together exactly 6 times. But since they won the Super Bowl once they have the higher ranking. And San Diego, they didn't even make it above the .500 win mark until 2009.

    I'm sure the only people happy with the list are Packer fans.
     
  24. fettpett

    fettpett Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    928
    Ratings:
    +217
    no, frankly the list is BS...It should take all Championships into account. Browns have 8 from both the NFL and AAFL and they are at the bottom..The Lions are at the very bottom and they have won Championships...it's a stupid list
     
  25. Bogart

    Bogart Duke Mantee

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,551
    Ratings:
    +871
    Couldn't help but laugh seeing the 49ers not in the Top 5 LOL
     

Share This Page