FREAKofSTEEL08 said:

Yea, I will agree that the Steelers LOST all three games....by not being as good or playing as good as those other teams.

Here's the deal: In 2005, the Steelers overall record gave them only a 6th place finish in the AFC, meaning of course that they may have been the 11th or 12th best team in the league. But, they squeaked into the playoffs and got hot. No power ranking would have ever had them as the best team in the league. By all logical rights they should have been ousted in the first or second round. But like I said, they got hot., and won.

The same is true in reverse here: By their overall record, they are not in the bottom feeders of the AFC, but by recent performance, they indeed are. Just as they got hot and pulled out an unexpected win then, here they got cold.

If you want to claim they were #1 that year because you say they proved it on the field, this year then you have to accept that they are #32 (or near there) because they have proved it on the field. I mean, when you lose to the worst 3 dregs, that means you are the worst dreg of all. The Browns, Chiefs, and Raiders have the 3 worst records in the AFC. Steelers lost to all of them. What does that make them? Maybe it is a good thing they met the Lions early on when they were playing better. I mean, what are you gonna do against good teams like the Packers, Dolphins etc.

But, if it is any consolation to you, here's hoping you beat the Ravens and knock them out of the playoffs as well.

@efootball said:

Keyword is almost, which destroys your logic.

I love the influx of trolls on this board. It means they are mad enough to try to be downers on Browns fans. Bring it on!

@the-gipper said:

For one they Beat your asses earlier this year. What , your 2 win Team should be ranked higher than them ? And according to the Experts , Pittsburgh Lost to KC and Oakland Much more than Oakland and KC WON those games. The experts have spoken, for what thats worth. Aint getting Pittsburgh to the Dance so who freaking cares anyway..

@bonedawg said:

haha so true. That has to be the most poorly done power rankings i've ever seen. when i saw the word "poop" describing a team, i lost all respect. If it's supposed to just be a fan's take on teams fair enough, but it's clear you try to make that professional, and it's just embarrassing. I love the bias towards the browns though. The lions beat us yet they are worse than us? i love the brownies but games are proven on the field.

To the jully dipshit, so the steelers "lost" to KC, Oakland and The browns, it wasn't the other team winning?? It wasn't Bruce Gradowski, the pride of Toledo, orchestrating a brilliant drive to slam it down your throats and win?

It wasn't our defense who sacked Big Ben 8 times, a few times on 3 man rushes?

Someone who says our time lost it and the other team didn't win it is straight up a pussy and doesn't "know" shit about football. By your logic dipshit, the giants didn't "win" the super bowl, the patriots "lost" it? Face it the steelers aren't good this year, and the browns beat them by being the better team. The real Steelers fan on this board admit it.

@bonedawg said:

Whatever, ESPN or CBS does "power rankings" as well. They are meaningless. The NFL has a playoff system that decides the winner....and they have a tie breaker system that generally deals with on field performance. So power ratings are like fantasy football....useless.

@jully said:

That is fine. We will take it. We have suffered numerous games against the Steelers the last 6-8 years where the Browns "lost" but the Steelers didn't "win".

Missed FGS, missed tackles, dropped passes, ad infinitum. All screwups by the Browns that lost them games. It still goes on the left hand side of the column.

@jully said:

Steeler fans can be somewhat annoying, but in general, I kind of enjoy exchanging insults with them. Some of them even display characteristics similar to other normal humans. This poster, however is just an idiot, and would still be an idiot if he/she were not a Steelers fan.

@jully said:

yet... they still won. don't make fun of 13 points until you can do it jackass.

@samoth said:

well, well, well..the browns are still in the gutter. like I stated anyone who "knows" football knows that the Steelers lost and the Browns did not win. cripes the browns only scored 13 points and none in the 2nd half.

@efootball said:

If it were just one of them, then I would say it was a random bad game. But all three? That, son, is a pattern of ineptitude.

@blowe said:

so by that logic, the redskins and falcons, who both almost beat the saints, are almost as good, then?

@efootball said:

Its been proven on the football field that they are better, so I'd say so.

@the-gipper said:

seriously? the steelers hit a rough stretch, but can you in all seriousness think that any of those teams are better that the steelers?