Power Rankings anyone?

[DonCorleone]

I have had the chance to look at several of the "experts" Power rankings before the season. I would love to see how the posters here actually rate the top 10 teams.

Thanks much

[drago]

I have had the chance to look at several of the "experts" Power rankings before the season. I would love to see how the posters here actually rate the top 10 teams.

Thanks much

1 Chargers

2 Pats

3 Colts

4 Saints

5 Eagles

6 Ravens

7 Jaguars

8 49ers

9 Jets

10 Seahawks

Broncos, Panthers, and Bears will all miss the playoffs, JMO.

[ECURB]

1. JETS

the rest

[DonCorleone]

1 Chargers

2 Pats

3 Colts

4 Saints

5 Eagles

6 Ravens

7 Jaguars

8 49ers

9 Jets

10 Seahawks

Broncos, Panthers, and Bears will all miss the playoffs, JMO.

Thanks much.

I see the Pats at 1 and Colts at 2.

[Afinogenov]

1. Pats

2. Chargers

3. Colts

4. Saints

5. Ravens

6. Eagles

7. Jets

8. Panthers

9. Bears

10. Broncos

[ECURB]

1. Colts

2. Chargers

3. Saints

4. Pats

5. Jaguars

6. Broncos

7. Jets

8. Bears

9. Ravens

10. Eagles

[drago]

Thanks much.

I see the Pats at 1 and Colts at 2.

I want to put the pats that high, but every time a team over spends in the offseason, no matter how good it looks on paper, it rarely works out. Look at the Yankees, they are the laughing stock of MLB because of what they spend, and how much they actually win.

[DonCorleone]

I want to put the pats that high, but every time a team over spends in the offseason, no matter how good it looks on paper, it rarely works out. Look at the Yankees, they are the laughing stock of MLB because of what they spend, and how much they actually win.

I sincerely hope that you are right. The only thing worse than the Pats winning another one, would be the Dolphins winning it.

[shasta]

I want to put the pats that high, but every time a team over spends in the offseason, no matter how good it looks on paper, it rarely works out. Look at the Yankees, they are the laughing stock of MLB because of what they spend, and how much they actually win.

I've seen you make this statement many times yet I don't see any proof to back it up. The PAtriots are still nearly 6 million under the cap and only added two long term value Contracts in A. T, and Welker. Your Perception of "overspending", simply isn't reality, because Stallworth and Moss both got greatly reduced one year deals with Patriot options beyond that. Maybe your concept of "over Spending" is differen't than mine, but when I think of the term "Over Spending", in terms of football and the cap, I think of teams over extending themselves with back loaded contracts that will eventually come due aginst the cap, thereby limiting future Free Agent moves or by which, will limit a teams ability to keep players they want to in the future. The bottom line is the Patriots have not done any of this so to say they "Over spent", is really just uninformed nonsense.

[StraightCash]

I've seen you make this statement many times yet I don't see any proof to back it up. The PAtriots are still nearly 6 million under the cap and only added two long term value Contracts in A. T, and Welker. Your Perception of "overspending", simply isn't reality, because Stallworth and Moss both got greatly reduced one year deals with Patriot options beyond that. Maybe your concept of "over Spending" is differen't than mine, but when I think of the term "Over Spending", in terms of football and the cap, I think of teams over extending themselves with back loaded contracts that will eventually come due aginst the cap, thereby limiting future Free Agent moves or by which, will limit a teams ability to keep players they want to in the future. The bottom line is the Patriots have not done any of this so to say they "Over spent", is really just uninformed nonsense.

Thats a good point. Although I think the pats will be a very good team this season.. I think their downfall would not be overspending.. but almost "over-upgrading"... I Know that sounds stupid, how can it be BAD to upgrade your team? The way I see it is that your team shouldn't be all all-stars, they should have a few, and then the rest of the team should be solid. If you have to many stars the chemistry just isn't there and none of the players play to the best of their ability. Look at the Yankees or Redskins.

[drago]

I've seen you make this statement many times yet I don't see any proof to back it up. The PAtriots are still nearly 6 million under the cap and only added two long term value Contracts in A. T, and Welker. Your Perception of "overspending", simply isn't reality, because Stallworth and Moss both got greatly reduced one year deals with Patriot options beyond that. Maybe your concept of "over Spending" is differen't than mine, but when I think of the term "Over Spending", in terms of football and the cap, I think of teams over extending themselves with back loaded contracts that will eventually come due aginst the cap, thereby limiting future Free Agent moves or by which, will limit a teams ability to keep players they want to in the future. The bottom line is the Patriots have not done any of this so to say they "Over spent", is really just uninformed nonsense.

I probably used the wrong adjective. I meant goign after high profile players (which generally implies overspending), in the Patriots' case maybe they didn't over spend. What they did do was go after high profile players, getting away from there concept of 'team before anything else'. I think Welker is a great pick up, the jets would have been lucky to land him, but as for moss, id on't see how he is a team first player. I don't know much about stalworth, other than him having some injury troubles.

Either way, i stand by the statement of the pats going after high profile instead of their normal way of conducting business. In short, they'll easily make the playoffs, but IMO, they won't be with in two games of winning the big one.

[#27TheDominator]

I probably used the wrong adjective. I meant goign after high profile players (which generally implies overspending), in the Patriots' case maybe they didn't over spend. What they did do was go after high profile players, getting away from there concept of 'team before anything else'. I think Welker is a great pick up, the jets would have been lucky to land him, but as for moss, id on't see how he is a team first player. I don't know much about stalworth, other than him having some injury troubles.

Either way, i stand by the statement of the pats going after high profile instead of their normal way of conducting business. In short, they'll easily make the playoffs, but IMO, they won't be with in two games of winning the big one.

I think it was a verb.

I don't see the Saints coming out of the NFC. I understand why everybody is picking them. I guess they have to be the favorites, I just feel that they were a Cinderella story and it's past midnight. I think the whole NFC west will be better which will hurt them too.

[drago]

I think it was a verb.

I don't see the Saints coming out of the NFC. I understand why everybody is picking them. I guess they have to be the favorites, I just feel that they were a Cinderella story and it's past midnight. I think the whole NFC west will be better which will hurt them too.

Hey man, i went to Carroll College. You heard of it? That's what I thought, i call it what i want.

[shasta]

I probably used the wrong adjective. I meant goign after high profile players (which generally implies overspending), in the Patriots' case maybe they didn't over spend. What they did do was go after high profile players, getting away from there concept of 'team before anything else'. I think Welker is a great pick up, the jets would have been lucky to land him, but as for moss, id on't see how he is a team first player. I don't know much about stalworth, other than him having some injury troubles.

Either way, i stand by the statement of the pats going after high profile instead of their normal way of conducting business. In short, they'll easily make the playoffs, but IMO, they won't be with in two games of winning the big one.

Fair enough, while I don't agree that the Patriots have gotten away from their concept of "team before anything else" I can see how the you might see it that way. The way I see it, the PAtriots have alway gone after the best talent they ccould, and been willing to give players with issues second chances, the difference is that they would never over spend for a Big time F.A. player which would in turn take them out of the running for that player. However as they have continued to have sucess, more and more Big Name F.A. have taken notice and been willing to take less $$$$ to play for them. This is exactly what happened with Adalius Thomas, Moss, Stallworth, Colvin and good many more. In the end it's imposible to say if they will or will not win the Super Bowl, it's too far away, and to many things could happen between now and then. I am however 100% content in the belife that my team has done everything they could to put the best team they can on the field in Sept. As a fan what more can you ask for?

[drago]

Fair enough, while I don't agree that the Patriots have gotten away from their concept of "team before anything else" I can see how the you might see it that way. The way I see it, the PAtriots have alway gone after the best talent they ccould, and been willing to give players with issues second chances, the difference is that they would never over spend for a Big time F.A. player which would in turn take them out of the running for that player. However as they have continued to have sucess, more and more Big Name F.A. have taken notice and been willing to take less $$$$ to play for them. This is exactly what happened with Adalius Thomas, Moss, Stallworth, Colvin and good many more. In the end it's imposible to say if they will or will not win the Super Bowl, it's too far away, and to many things could happen between now and then. I am however 100% content in the belife that my team has done everything they could to put the best team they can on the field in Sept. As a fan what more can you ask for?

No arguments here. You can tace my postings as saying I wanted the Jets to get Winfield, or Thomas. So i can't sit here and say 'if the jets had the same offseason as the pats, that i wouldn't be excited'.

[94SupraTT]

It boogles my mind that so many people have the Saints rated higher than the Bears when we soundly beat them in the playoffs.

[Gainzo]

It boogles my mind that so many people have the Saints rated higher than the Bears when we soundly beat them in the playoffs.

I can't argue with last year's NFC Championship game, but the Bears offseason has been a mess.

1). The Lovie situation

2). Giving up Jones for next to nothing

3). The ongoing Briggs holdout

4). Accusations that Urlacher has been sending nasty text messages to his baby's mama

5). Rex Grossman!

The Bears will win the NFC North by default as that is the worst division in football.

[Greenseed3]

Wouldn't it be more realistic to list the top 6 teams of both conferences?

In no particular order :

AFC:

San Diego

New England

Baltimore

Denver

Indy

New York

NFC:

Chicago

New Orleans

San Fransisco

St. Louis

Dallas

Philly

[drago]

Wouldn't it be more realistic to list the top 6 teams of both conferences?

In no particular order :

AFC:

San Diego

New England

Baltimore

Denver

Indy

New York

NFC:

Chicago

New Orleans

San Fransisco

St. Louis

Dallas

Philly

Its funny you say that, i was going to respond to gainzo's post of the NFC north being the worst division in football. then you post two teams from the REAL worst division in football, NFC East. They have the loan stud in Phily, but past that, they are crap.

[rick34125]

1 Pats

2 Chargers

3 Colts

4 Bears

5 Saints

6 Ravens

7 Eagles

8 Broncos

9 Bengals

10 Seahawks

I have the Jets right now as borderline playoff contenders.

The pats are invincible until someone discovers a way to lace the football with kryptonite.

[BornJetsFan1983]

1 Pats

2 Chargers

3 Colts

4 Bears

5 Saints

6 Ravens

7 Eagles

8 Broncos

9 Bengals

10 Seahawks

I have the Jets right now as borderline playoff contenders.

The pats are invincible until someone discovers a way to lace the football with kryptonite.

or makes them play the colts

[94SupraTT]

I can't argue with last year's NFC Championship game, but the Bears offseason has been a mess.

1). The Lovie situation

2). Giving up Jones for next to nothing

3). The ongoing Briggs holdout

4). Accusations that Urlacher has been sending nasty text messages to his baby's mama

5). Rex Grossman!

The Bears will win the NFC North by default as that is the worst division in football.

1. Lovie got his money. He is a top 5 paid coach. Hardly what I would call a mess especially with his agent coming out and saying the two sides were never that far apart.

2. Jones is an above average back at best. I've explained this already. I'm glad we got what equates to a 3rd rounder for him. Benson is by far the better back. (The games Rex struggle tended to be the games in which Jones played horrid. More often than not Jones benefitted from Rex, not the other way around.)

3. Briggs is a good linebacker no doubt however getting both Mike Brown and Tommie Harris back is a HUGE boost for our D. If you've followed the Bears at all you would know that Briggs is Urlacher's 3rd sidekick and is easily replaceable (see Rosevelt Colvin, and Warrick Holdman)

4. Who in the hell cares about what Urlacher does in his personal life, the dude has like 3 kids out of wedlock what in the hell does that have to do with football.

5. Rex-I'm pleased with his first year as a starter. Was he horrid at times? No doubt, people seem to forget the good games that he had and the early MVP talk that was going on when he was on his A game. Also, adding a quality TE (Olsen) we only help him, not only that the progression of Bernard Berrian as a quality receiver has really helped out our offense. Our D and a consistant, between the tackles, smash mouth running game will all keep us in games in spite of Grossman. Rex will be on a short leash, I'm not worried about him. If we can win 11 games with Kyle freakin Orton we will be just fine.

[serphnx]

Usually a free agent splurge doesn't work because the team lacks chemistry, and especially in football, when you don't work as a unit, you can't be the best. The thing with the Patriots though is, they have BB and a ton of players that buy into the team philosophy, so getting new cogs that fit might not backfire. This isn't the Redskins.

[Nick Ferraro]

1 Chargers

2 Pats

3 Colts

4 Saints

5 Eagles

6 Ravens

7 Jaguars

8 49ers

9 Jets

10 Seahawks

Broncos, Panthers, and Bears will all miss the playoffs, JMO.

The Bears are going to miss the playoffs? They can play with 9 men on the field and win their division.

The Jaguars might be the seveth best team...in FL.

[drago]

The Bears are going to miss the playoffs? They can play with 9 men on the field and win their division.

The Jaguars might be the seveth best team...in FL.

That's why they play the games. The Jags have been improving every year, their receiver will be in their 3rd and 4th years, and ready to have good seasons (imo).

The Bears are not that much better than the packers or vikings, either one of those teams could sweep them and i wouldn't be surprised. Remember, the bears are still starting a QB that wouldn't be a good back-up on most teams.

excuse me for not having faith in the super bowl losers for the 3rd straight year. I said the same thing about the Steelers last year, and the Eagles the year before.

[Nick Ferraro]

That's why they play the games. The Jags have been improving every year, their receiver will be in their 3rd and 4th years, and ready to have good seasons (imo).

The Bears are not that much better than the packers or vikings, either one of those teams could sweep them and i wouldn't be surprised. Remember, the bears are still starting a QB that wouldn't be a good back-up on most teams.

excuse me for not having faith in the super bowl losers for the 3rd straight year. I said the same thing about the Steelers last year, and the Eagles the year before.

The Jags WRs better improve enough to throw the ball to themselves. They got nothing at QB. They are trying to get Culpepper. That's all we need to know. They aren't the 7th best AFC team.

The Vikings and Packers have not caught up to the Bears enough to win a road game at Soldier Field. The Vikings are basicaly starting a rookie at QB. The Packers need help along both lines, and they don't have a proven RB on the roster.

The Eagles and Steelers had much more to overcome after losing the Super Bowl than the Bears do. Big Ben's accident and the T.O. saga were big factors in their poor seasons. The Bears have some issues, and you are right to question Grossman, but they have too much talent to miss the playoffs in the sorry NFC.

[Green DNA]

The Chargers will underachieve this year no matter how talented they are! Two words - Norv Turner. This guy is a small step up from Rich Kotite and will be an anchor around their neck.

[94SupraTT]

The Bears are not that much better than the packers or vikings, either one of those teams could sweep them and i wouldn't be surprised. Remember, the bears are still starting a QB that wouldn't be a good back-up on most teams.

excuse me for not having faith in the super bowl losers for the 3rd straight year. I said the same thing about the Steelers last year, and the Eagles the year before.

You can't be serious. The Packers have no answer for the loss of Ahman Green. And Favre without a running game is a recipe for 30 INTs. Their D wasn't exactly shutting anyone down. The Vikings are basically starting a rookie QB and their secondary was getting TORCHED last season. AP is only going to help so much. I don't even need to mention the Lions.

Grossman wouldn't be a good backup? Grossman was no doubt streaky. He did however have 7. Yes, 7 games rated over 100. Your boy Chad had 2 games with a QB rating over 100. Grossman threw 23 TDs to Chads 17. Like I said I'm pleased with that for his first full year starting. Sounds like someone is still mad their team laid a GOOSE EGG against the Bears at home.

[Gainzo]

You can't be serious. The Packers have no answer for the loss of Ahman Green. And Favre without a running game is a recipe for 30 INTs. Their D wasn't exactly shutting anyone down. The Vikings are basically starting a rookie QB and their secondary was getting TORCHED last season. AP is only going to help so much. I don't even need to mention the Lions.

Grossman wouldn't be a good backup? Grossman was no doubt streaky. He did however have 7. Yes, 7 games rated over 100. Your boy Chad had 2 games with a QB rating over 100. Grossman threw 23 TDs to Chads 17. Like I said I'm pleased with that for his first full year starting. Sounds like someone is still mad their team laid a GOOSE EGG against the Bears at home.

Did you watch the Bears Pats game last season? I was there and the Bears passing attack was Grossman throwing it deep hoping that there was a PI called against the D.

Grossman threw 20 picks and had a completion % of 54. That's horrible.

You should be happy that the Bears play in the worst division in the NFL. If they played in any other division they would be lucky to win 7 games.

[94SupraTT]

That's why they play the games. The Jags have been improving every year, their receiver will be in their 3rd and 4th years, and ready to have good seasons (imo).

The Bears are not that much better than the packers or vikings, either one of those teams could sweep them and i wouldn't be surprised. Remember, the bears are still starting a QB that wouldn't be a good back-up on most teams.

excuse me for not having faith in the super bowl losers for the 3rd straight year. I said the same thing about the Steelers last year, and the Eagles the year before.

Did you watch the Bears Pats game last season? I was there and the Bears passing attack was Grossman throwing it deep hoping that there was a PI called against the D.

Grossman threw 20 picks and had a completion % of 54. That's horrible.

You should be happy that the Bears play in the worst division in the NFL. If they played in any other division they would be lucky to win 7 games.

You are judging Grossman off of one game. Hardly an objective way to judge a QB. Grossman was forcing it that game. At times when he feels the heat he does chuck the ball up. Conversely he is at his best when we have a consistant running game and when he spreads the ball around. Grossman did throw 20 INTs and as I've stated he was streaky. He had 7 games with over 100QB rating and I believe 5 with a QB rating of 50 or lower. Grossman was not consistant at all. He was either boom or bust last year. I've stated on the Bears board quite a few times if we can get a consistant running game it will help Grossman out tremendously. Not only that a TE that is a vertical threat is going to help us also. (Greg Olsen).

The Bears would only win 7 games if we were in another division? Are you kidding me. Did you miss the asskicking the Seahawks received. I guess you also missed the asskicking the Saints got in the playoffs. So lets see when beat the hell out of 2 of the 3 divisional champs in the NFC but we would only win 7 games if we weren't in the NFC North. You sir are an idiot. We won 11 games in 2005 with Kyle freakin' Orton and our D carrying us. There is no reason to think our D can't carry us again even if Grossman falters.

[Gainzo]

The Bears would only win 7 games if we were in another division? Are you kidding me. Did you miss the asskicking the Seahawks received. I guess you also missed the asskicking the Saints got in the playoffs. So lets see when beat the hell out of 2 of the 3 divisional champs in the NFC but we would only win 7 games if we weren't in the NFC North. You sir are an idiot. We won 11 games in 2005 with Kyle freakin' Orton and our D carrying us. There is no reason to think our D can't carry us again even if Grossman falters.

The Bears play in the NFC. I should have said that if the Bears played in the AFC they would be lucky to win 7 games.

The Bears beat the 9-7 Seahawks and 10-6 Saints. Awesome.

Apart from the Bears the highest win total for an NFC Division winner was 10.

The lowest win total for an AFC Division winner was 12 (Pats & Colts).

[94SupraTT]

The Bears play in the NFC. I should have said that if the Bears played in the AFC they would be lucky to win 7 games.

The Bears beat the 9-7 Seahawks and 10-6 Saints. Awesome.

Apart from the Bears the highest win total for an NFC Division winner was 10.

The lowest win total for an AFC Division winner was 12 (Pats & Colts).

But we still managed to beat the Jets. So what does that say about the Jets. Using that logic the Jets should only be good for 6 wins in the AFC if the Bears would only be good for 7 wins in the AFC. Regardless of how you try to spin it your logic is FLAWED.

[Gainzo]

But we still managed to beat the Jets. So what does that say about the Jets. Using that logic the Jets should only be good for 6 wins in the AFC if the Bears would only be good for 7 wins in the AFC. Regardless of how you try to spin it your logic is FLAWED.

The Jets beat the Patriots in Foxboro. Something the Bears failed to do.

The Pats went 4-0 and the Jets 3-1 against the NFC North.

The Bears were 2-2 against the AFC East.

I think my logic is pretty sound.

If you are trying to make the case that the Bears are a great team you are posting on the wrong board. I would suggest you beat your chest on NFC team boards as AFC teams fans think the Bears are overrated because they play in a crappy conference and even worse division.

[94SupraTT]

The Bears play in the NFC. I should have said that if the Bears played in the AFC they would be lucky to win 7 games.

The Bears beat the 9-7 Seahawks and 10-6 Saints. Awesome.

Apart from the Bears the highest win total for an NFC Division winner was 10.

The lowest win total for an AFC Division winner was 12 (Pats & Colts).

The Jets beat the Patriots in Foxboro. Something the Bears failed to do.

The Pats went 4-0 and the Jets 3-1 against the NFC North.

The Bears were 2-2 against the AFC East.

I think my logic is pretty sound.

You are trying to judge teams by proxy. Unfreakin' real. I'm done with you. Why even play the games if we can judge all teams by proxy? We can both spin this proxy thing anyway you want. I for one will not waste my time with moronic arguments. Feel free to respond but I doubt I'll read it. I don't frequent this board often.

Bears > Jets

Regardless of the conference the Bears are still better than the Jets. Not by some proxy bull****, HEAD TO HEAD.