Well I held on to the win and I'm now 6-0. I have no idea how I'm pulling this off, I just must have been really lucky when drafting.

It isn't decieving though unless you expected us to be much worse or we had played completely terrible teams and won them all.

3-2 isn't a deceptive record in any way. I, along with other, expected us to go 4-1 at this point. How is going worse than that decieving?

You haven't beaten anybody of note.

Is that our fault? We've beaten teams and are rated about average in power rankings, rightly so. It isn't like we are being talked about as title contenders or anything.

[uHow is being 3-2 deceptive unless you expected us to go much worse? [/u

3-2 is average. That would only be decpetive if you expected us to be 5-0 or 0-5.

ANY DECENT TEAMS YOUVE PLAYED YOU'VE LOST AGAINST.YOU ONLY HAVE A WINNING RECORD BECAUSE YOU'VE BEATEN BAD TEAMS. Is that clearer? I read a few weeks pages back that you wouldnt give Denver credit as theyd beaten bad teams....capiche. By the way theyre 6-0 now.

=redPlus they have hardly beaten anybody worthwile

Cincy, they defeated on a complete fluke play.

Cleveland are atrocious. This years Detroit. I honestly think i could assmeble a team capable of beating them.

Oakland. Well Oakland are Oakland. Overall poor, especially on offence.

If they win the next three weeks and are 6-0 i'll re-asses my opinion.


There we go Mr Conroy, before engaging into arguments, try and think what youve said previously.

You clearly can't read. I've posted this two pages back.



I was wrong about the Broncos, they are a legitimate good team.

However you evidently don't know what deception means.



So if you'd actually answer the question. For us to have a decieving record of 3-2 that means you must think we should be either 5-0 or 0-5. [i[uSO ARE WE DECEPTIVELY GOOD OR DECEPTIVELY BAD?[/u[/i

We are hardly deceptive if we are the epitomy of middle of the road, ranked around sixteen in most power rankings, not far above 500. Again, does that mean you think we should be top or bottom?

We only lost by one TD to each team. I expect us to get to around 9 or 10 wins. Hardly 16-0 is it.

Anyone going on Sunday then?

and again, the point your arguing against you used yourself with the comment below, implying Denver's record is decieving as they hadnt played any good teams and saying youd wait till they were 6-0 till giving them credit...which is what im saying.

Plus they have hardly beaten anybody worthwile

Cincy, they defeated on a complete fluke play.

Cleveland are atrocious. This years Detroit. I honestly think i could assmeble a team capable of beating them.

Oakland. Well Oakland are Oakland. Overall poor, especially on offence.

If they win the next three weeks and are 6-0 i'll re-asses my opinion.

Moi. Travelling done early Sunday Morning, staying at the travel lodge Wembley. Hoping to check in, get in the Green Man for 10 - 11ish, where hopefully they'll show the Utd / Liverpool match.

IF YOU COULD ACTUALLY ANSWER AS OPPOSED TO QUOTING STUFF I'VE SAID. FOR US TO HAVE A DECIEVING RECORD YOU'D HAVE TO THINK WE'D EITHER BE EXCELLENT (5-0) OR TERRIBLE (0-5) TO BE ANYTHING LIKE DECIEVING. SO WHICH IS IT?

Average is not decieving unless you envisaged us being either excellent or terrible.


I'm fully aware of what i've said regarding Denver, you don't need to constantly quote it. They were 3-0 after beating average teams, they get credit for beating those teams they played. Simply i wasn't going to drastically re-think my opinion on them until they had played good teams. They have and i've said i was wrong. Not that they are deceiving.