I was messing around on Internet Archive and found this. Hopefully the link works. Some fun stuff on Internet Archive if you're ever bored. Link - ( New Window )
6.6 out of 10 would be a wild card team at best.
That’s why numbers like they aren’t worth the page they are printed on. How a team plays TOGETHER is the far more important point.
Pro Preview, Sporting News, Street and Smith. I'll have to try digging them up and doing screenshots sometime.
According to that old TQ grading system, any team over 65 was a strong playoff contender (over 70 is a Super Bowl-level team), so they had the Giants rated pretty accurately. In contrast, the 1997 Giants were rated at 44.5 (anything below 54.5 was classified as "rebuilding project with middle of the pack possibilities." Very rarely did a team hit the 70 mark.
RE: I've got a bunch of old NFL season preview mags
Pro Preview, Sporting News, Street and Smith. I'll have to try digging them up and doing screenshots sometime.
According to that old TQ grading system, any team over 65 was a strong playoff contender (over 70 is a Super Bowl-level team), so they had the Giants rated pretty accurately. In contrast, the 1997 Giants were rated at 44.5 (anything below 54.5 was classified as "rebuilding project with middle of the pack possibilities." Very rarely did a team hit the 70 mark.
That’s why numbers like they aren’t worth the page they are printed on. How a team plays TOGETHER is the far more important point.
Parcells thought the Giants could have beaten the '85 Bears in the playoffs.
According to that old TQ grading system, any team over 65 was a strong playoff contender (over 70 is a Super Bowl-level team), so they had the Giants rated pretty accurately. In contrast, the 1997 Giants were rated at 44.5 (anything below 54.5 was classified as "rebuilding project with middle of the pack possibilities." Very rarely did a team hit the 70 mark.
According to that old TQ grading system, any team over 65 was a strong playoff contender (over 70 is a Super Bowl-level team), so they had the Giants rated pretty accurately. In contrast, the 1997 Giants were rated at 44.5 (anything below 54.5 was classified as "rebuilding project with middle of the pack possibilities." Very rarely did a team hit the 70 mark.
That would be awesome.
Yep I had it too
I used to reread over nd over till memorizing