13-2 Team with only 3 Pro bowlers? 2-13 Team with 5 Pro bowlers?

[CMIZ5290]

The biggest surprise to me was no Falcons making it on defense. They get all the hype on their talent on the offensive side of the ball, but it's been the defense more times than not that have bailed them out. I really thought they would have had at least 4 make it on defense....

[novakjr]

I understand the sentiment here, and agree that this specific scenario isn't right. But looking at overall team performance isn't the way to judge pro-bowlers, it only judges the quality of the rest of the team surrounding said pro-bowlers. Theoretically, I could envision a very top heavy team with 4 or 5 Great players, while the rest of the team is absolutely awful resulting in a 2-14 record. I could also see a very deep team, with a lot of solid players and maybe 2 or 3 great players going 14-2.

[HRBAKER]

David,
That all sounds logical but have you watched the Chiefs?
Not 5 PBlers there.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

David,
That all sounds logical but have you watched the Chiefs?
Not 5 PBlers there.

+1....The Chiefs having 5 Pro bowlers might be the biggest joke in the history of all Pro Bowls. I think this year there were 8 or 9 teams who did not have a single one. What kind of sense does that make?

[Jlighter]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

+1....The Chiefs having 5 Pro bowlers might be the biggest joke in the history of all Pro Bowls.

Except for the actual pro bowl itself.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by Jlighter

Except for the actual pro bowl itself.

I'll agree with this. With the exception of the The Real Housewives of Anywhere, the Pro Bowl may be about about the biggest waste of airtime ever.

[jefferyepayne]

This is what happens when the fans are allowed to vote. Is football a sport or entertainment? If it's all about entertainment, then the fans should rule. If it's about actual performance, having fans vote is a farce.

jeff

[CMIZ5290]

Jeff- totally agree with you....

[chris6net]

I am not sure but I believe the Giants (Super Bowl Champs) had only 3 pro-bowlers last year. For a fan of a team that has never won anything I would worry about at least winning a playoff game than the silly pro-bowl voting. The Falcons have had a great year and deserve a lot of praise but SD was 14-2 a few years ago and lost in the playoffs and never recovered and KC was the same a decade ago and never recovered. Atlanta seems to me like a paper Tiger so lets see them get to at least the Super Bowl to validate their season. They were dogs last year against a 9-7 team in the first round as the game was non competitive.

[bigred1]

You mean some people actually watch it. An exhibition game at best. The only players who care, it seems, are the ones who have bonuses in their contract. I usually bet the over. lol

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

David,
That all sounds logical but have you watched the Chiefs?
Not 5 PBlers there.

I'm right there with ya. And I even said it wasn't right in this specific scenario.

The point of my post was to agree with the sentiment regarding the Chiefs. But also acknowledge that I didn't think that team records should necessarily determine the amount of pro-bowlers that a team should/could be deserving.. Especially when it comes to non-skill position players. Especially when comparing the numbers of two teams in different conferences. So it's not like these Chiefs players were chosen over Falcons players.

I can agree with Charles and the Punter. I'm actually kinda ok with Hali as well. Derrick Johnson has to be a complete a total joke though. Especially with some very worthy candidates that he's getting the nod over. D'quell Jackson comes to mind first(probably because I'm a Cleveland fan but I'm sure there's other players). D'Q is having a hell of a lot better of a year than Johnson.