PDA

View Full Version : ESPN May Power Rankings



Flatinum
05-12-2008, 09:09 AM
I know it's only May and I don't really know what to expect from the Broncos this year. But I don't think they're that bad.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking?season=2008&week=0

Fan in Exile
05-12-2008, 09:14 AM
I don't know if I would place the Broncos too much higher than this myself, however the commentary really shows how little they know about the Broncos' off-season moves. We really don't have that many holes right now. We've got some questions but few holes. It's such a generic line that it makes me wonder if they actually bothered to look at the Broncos offseason moves at all.

TheReverend
05-12-2008, 09:30 AM
Easily a top ten team.

If I want to toss the homer hat on, it's top 5.

Realistically, it's easily a top 10 team.

Medford Bronco
05-12-2008, 09:35 AM
these polls mean nothing in May.

until we see how healthy we are, then we can be better
but for anyone to think we are elite is absurd

Flatinum
05-12-2008, 09:40 AM
these polls mean nothing in May.

until we see how healthy we are, then we can be better
but for anyone to think we are elite is absurd

I just think they're in the top 2/3 of the league, not the the bottom 1/3.

WARHORSE
05-12-2008, 09:56 AM
I often wonder what the criteria is for people who ESPN search for to be their analysts and journalists.

Not much it seems.

G_Money
05-12-2008, 10:05 AM
Seems a little low to me...

But our OL and DL are still massive unknown quanties. If they work out, we're gonna be good. If they're as porous as last year we're probably gonna be a bottom-third team. I don't have a problem with the waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay early ranking.

I think we're all really interested to see if Clady and Harris/Pears/Kuper can keep Jay from getting killed off the ends, and if our interior OL can move the pile when it counts.

And how well Marshall can catch a ball with one arm.

And whether it was our DL talent or our DL scheme that was totally incompetent.

And if we can keep a RB healthy enough to tote the rock.

It's gonna be a much more exciting camp and pre-season time than we're used to around here, when we mostly just run through the motions and get ready for our fast start and mediocre finish for the season.

~G

Medford Bronco
05-12-2008, 10:07 AM
I just think they're in the top 2/3 of the league, not the the bottom 1/3.

I think maybe 12-16 range at best.

like G said our lines are major unknowns and I am still not sure
we fixed our pathetic run defense from a year ago?

I hope we did but until we see it we wont know.

so these polls are needed to be taken with a grain of salt.

(not saying anyone is overreacting just my humble opinion)

lex
05-12-2008, 10:09 AM
I often wonder what the criteria is for people who ESPN search for to be their analysts and journalists.

Not much it seems.

The first requirement is that theyre from the new england area. Seriously, a large portion of their staff really is from that area and its been observed by on-air "talent" as well as Hank Steinbrenner. The national media is concentrated in the east. And in more recent years, the media has started playing more towards larger cities. This has resulted in an alarming decline in due diligence on their part.

So its a combination of things. 1) where the national media is concentrated; 2) that region also has a high concentration of schools many consider to be reputable...you could have two schools that are the same but if its east its more likely to be recognizable; 3) local media in places like Denver are often overcome with hacks who play to the national media...they have their own aspirations. So the net effect is the local guys tell the national guys what they want to hear. It happens here in Chicago all the time. Case in point, very few Cubs fans I know actually believe in curses...thats more interesting to guys in placed like Bristol CT and so if you want to get on E!SPN and youre a local guy, you start saying things like the curse is valid.

MOtorboat
05-12-2008, 10:11 AM
The first requirement is that theyre from the new england area. Seriously, a large portion of their staff really is from that area and its been observed by on-air "talent" as well as Hank Steinbrenner. The national media is concentrated in the east. And in more recent years, the media has started playing more towards larger cities. This has resulted in an alarming decline in due diligence on their part.

The majority of their reporters are from other areas. At least on-air NFL guys. Mortensen is from Arkansas, Rinaldi is from Dallas. Rachel Nichols from California. Sal is from Philadelphia, which is approaching the northeast, so I'm failing to see where their on-air NFL guys are just from the northeast.

They have a NFL columnist from Denver...(though I've found that on here, most people don't like him).

Ziggy
05-12-2008, 10:16 AM
It's a fair ranking for a team that went 7-9 last season. Denver picked up a lot of players through the draft and free agency, but they have done nothing to PROVE that the team has improved yet.

I'm with GMoney on this one. Training camp should be one of the most interesting since Shanahan came to Denver. There is huge competition at almost every position. I can't wait TC and preseason to kick off.

lex
05-12-2008, 10:18 AM
The majority of their reporters are from other areas. At least on-air NFL guys. Mortensen is from Arkansas, Rinaldi is from Dallas. Rachel Nichols from California. Sal is from Philadelphia, which is approaching the northeast, so I'm failing to see where their on-air NFL guys are just from the northeast.

They have a NFL columnist from Denver...(though I've found that on here, most people don't like him).

See my further explanation.

Fan in Exile
05-12-2008, 10:28 AM
It's a fair ranking for a team that went 7-9 last season. Denver picked up a lot of players through the draft and free agency, but they have done nothing to PROVE that the team has improved yet.

See this is one of those comments that drives me crazy. All of the people that we brought in have done a lot to prove themselves. It seems to me that when people say this they very often just aren't taking the time, or can't understand what the people have done.

Robertson has done a lot. Boss has done a lot. Even Niko has done a lot. That really helps us out where we were hurting last year on our run D.

It's also not just about the guys we've brought in but the guys who got a lot of experience last year. Thomas and Crowder got a lot better over the course of the season.

Even if you're talking about Clady he's done a lot to prove himself. I'm not saying he's a guaranteed star or that you can't find first round busts, but he's shown a lot on the field. People just have to know the right things to look for.

Don't give me that what they did in college doesn't mean anything in the NFL line either because that's pure garbage. College gets guys ready for the NFL, what they put on tape in College shows what they can do. No some people can't translate that into the NFL but it doesn't mean they haven't done anything.

I think it's a great sign that we're really only counting on one rookie to come in and help us.

MOtorboat
05-12-2008, 10:33 AM
See my further explanation.

The people who voted in this pool:
• Mike Sando on the AFC East and NFC West - Pacific Northwest
• James Walker on the AFC North and NFC North - Ohio
• Pat Yasinskas on the AFC South and NFC South - Charlotte
• Bill Williamson on the AFC West - Denver via the north (Minnesota, Wisconsin)
• Matt Mosley on the NFC East - Dallas
• John Clayton - Seattle
• Jeremy Green - Ohio

Sorry, just failing to see the East Coast Bias.

Kaylore
05-12-2008, 10:38 AM
I love these power rankings. They are more hype than anything else.

Here is last year's preseason rankings:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking?week=0&season=2007

Every year the media puts their favorites at the top: New England, Indy, Dallas, Chargers.

The Saints get too much love. I love them too, but people need to be honest.

NFC East typically overvalued.

Every year everyone thinks Arizona is going to better than it is. (Seriously, they're always bad.) No doubt someone will come in and explain why this year will be different and that they're a "sleeper." They're a sleeper every year.

Yeah, this doesn't shock me. :coffee:

underrated29
05-12-2008, 10:56 AM
can someone post the link. I cant see it.

I hate this computer.

TIA

Ziggy
05-12-2008, 11:05 AM
See this is one of those comments that drives me crazy. All of the people that we brought in have done a lot to prove themselves. It seems to me that when people say this they very often just aren't taking the time, or can't understand what the people have done.

Robertson has done a lot. Boss has done a lot. Even Niko has done a lot. That really helps us out where we were hurting last year on our run D.

It's also not just about the guys we've brought in but the guys who got a lot of experience last year. Thomas and Crowder got a lot better over the course of the season.

Even if you're talking about Clady he's done a lot to prove himself. I'm not saying he's a guaranteed star or that you can't find first round busts, but he's shown a lot on the field. People just have to know the right things to look for.

Don't give me that what they did in college doesn't mean anything in the NFL line either because that's pure garbage. College gets guys ready for the NFL, what they put on tape in College shows what they can do. No some people can't translate that into the NFL but it doesn't mean they haven't done anything.

I think it's a great sign that we're really only counting on one rookie to come in and help us.


I'm guessing it's not a long drive. Robertson has proven himself to be a good player, but other than that I disagree. Boss was average at best in Detroit. Niko hasn't proven anything outside of special teams, and no rookie has proven anything on the NFL level before thier first training camp.

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 11:23 AM
I love these power rankings. They are more hype than anything else.

Here is last year's preseason rankings:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking?week=0&season=2007

Every year the media puts their favorites at the top: New England, Indy, Dallas, Chargers.

The Saints get too much love. I love them too, but people need to be honest.

NFC East typically overvalued.

Every year everyone thinks Arizona is going to better than it is. (Seriously, they're always bad.) No doubt someone will come in and explain why this year will be different and that they're a "sleeper." They're a sleeper every year.

Yeah, this doesn't shock me. :coffee:

But overall the reason that the media likes New England, Indy, Dallas, Chargers, they are pretty good organizations with alot of talent.. Mostly good to great coaching.. Excepting DAL that has been a roller coaster a few years ago all of them solid players the past 5 years or so..

Also remember where the population they are selling to lives.. DEN is a minor blip in the buying public compared to the East and west coasts..

Not that should make a difference but there will always be some bias because of it..

Fan in Exile
05-12-2008, 11:27 AM
I'm guessing it's not a long drive. Robertson has proven himself to be a good player, but other than that I disagree. Boss was average at best in Detroit. Niko hasn't proven anything outside of special teams, and no rookie has proven anything on the NFL level before thier first training camp.

Nice way to begin with an insult, I'm sure that helps your point.

I would say that average makes Boss better than Webster, and his coverage skills are better which makes him an improvement.

Niko has proven a lot more than just special teams. He's been on the field as a MIKE they've got NFL tape on him. Remember as well that there's a lot more that goes on in the NFL besides just Sundays and Niko's been through all of that which proves a lot. In addition to that moving D.J. back to WILL makes the team better.

I don't actually think the statement "proven anything at the NFL level means anything", although it is nice to see you back off of your "haven't proven anything" statement. Clady's shown a lot about himself, and since he's the only rookie we're really counting on I'm not so worried.

Do we still have questions, sure, but to say we brought in a lot of guys who haven't proven anything is such an exaggeration that it's simply not true.

Ziggy
05-12-2008, 11:49 AM
Nice way to begin with an insult, I'm sure that helps your point.
I would say that average makes Boss better than Webster, and his coverage skills are better which makes him an improvement.

Niko has proven a lot more than just special teams. He's been on the field as a MIKE they've got NFL tape on him. Remember as well that there's a lot more that goes on in the NFL besides just Sundays and Niko's been through all of that which proves a lot. In addition to that moving D.J. back to WILL makes the team better.

I don't actually think the statement "proven anything at the NFL level means anything", although it is nice to see you back off of your "haven't proven anything" statement. Clady's shown a lot about himself, and since he's the only rookie we're really counting on I'm not so worried.

Do we still have questions, sure, but to say we brought in a lot of guys who haven't proven anything is such an exaggeration that it's simply not true.

It was meant as a joke. My apologies. My sense of humor is ...let's say...different than most. I'll be sure to be more careful with that when responding to people's posts.

I'm rooting for all of these guys to do good. Yes, Boss is better than Webster. I'm hoping he can go from being average to well above average in a defense that utilizes his athletic ability more. I'm not sold on Niko, but I hope he pans out. I'm very high on Larsen. I think that he may push Niko hard for the starting MLB job. Just a gut feeling.

It still all starts on the LOS. The only proven player we picked up on the defensive LOS was Robertson. I've defended that trade over and over again in another thread, but I don't know if he is enough to turn that D-line around. We're putting a lot of stock in our 2nd year players on defense. If Moss, Crowder, and Thomas don't come through this year, it will be another long season on defense.

On offense, we are getting Hamilton and Nalen back, but who knows how much they have left. Nalen is coming off of a serious injury. I hope he can step in and pick up where he left off. Hamilton is overrated IMO and one concussion away from retirement. Clady is an unknown, and so is the RT spot. The way I see it, the only spot on the offensive line without a huge question mark is at RG with Holland.

The Broncos have done a great job building for the future of our LOS the last 2 years, but this year we still have a ton of question marks. The season could go either way, depending on how the vets come back from injuries, and how the rooks and 2nd year guys develop.

dogfish
05-12-2008, 11:56 AM
See this is one of those comments that drives me crazy. All of the people that we brought in have done a lot to prove themselves. It seems to me that when people say this they very often just aren't taking the time, or can't understand what the people have done.

Robertson has done a lot. Boss has done a lot. Even Niko has done a lot. That really helps us out where we were hurting last year on our run D.

It's also not just about the guys we've brought in but the guys who got a lot of experience last year. Thomas and Crowder got a lot better over the course of the season.

Even if you're talking about Clady he's done a lot to prove himself. I'm not saying he's a guaranteed star or that you can't find first round busts, but he's shown a lot on the field. People just have to know the right things to look for.

Don't give me that what they did in college doesn't mean anything in the NFL line either because that's pure garbage. College gets guys ready for the NFL, what they put on tape in College shows what they can do. No some people can't translate that into the NFL but it doesn't mean they haven't done anything.

I think it's a great sign that we're really only counting on one rookie to come in and help us.



why is it that whenever someone has something less than flattering to say about the broncos, you always say that "they haven't done their research, or they just don't understand". . . ?


is it so tough to accept that some people just don't view the team in the same positive light that you do? including some of us who follow them every bit as closely and understand quite well the moves that they've made? looks to me like just another way that someone's found to validate their own opinion. . .

i agree with ziggy-- none of our additions but robertson have proven that they can be impact players in the NFL. . . . and if boss is an upgrade from a stiff to a warm body, is that really the kind of move that demands attention from national analysts? seriously, you mentioned niko's practice tape-- do you honestly expect that the guys from ESPiN have been reviewing it to see if the broncos deserve a higher ranking? i fully believe that he has the POTENTIAL to help our run efense, just as larsen does, but just proving that he can stick on an NFL roster doesn't guarantee that he can help us win more gamse than we did last year. . .

people always want to throw out the names of players we've added over the offseason as rational for why we should be getting more respect. . . but that completely ignores the fact that every single team in the league added guys over the offseason. . . sure, this team has talent, and a chance to be good-- so does everyone else. . .

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 11:59 AM
It was meant as a joke. My apologies. My sense of humor is ...let's say...different than most. I'll be sure to be more careful with that when responding to people's posts.

I'm rooting for all of these guys to do good. Yes, Boss is better than Webster. I'm hoping he can go from being average to well above average in a defense that utilizes his athletic ability more. I'm not sold on Niko, but I hope he pans out. I'm very high on Larsen. I think that he may push Niko hard for the starting MLB job. Just a gut feeling.

It still all starts on the LOS. The only proven player we picked up on the defensive LOS was Robertson. I've defended that trade over and over again in another thread, but I don't know if he is enough to turn that D-line around. We're putting a lot of stock in our 2nd year players on defense. If Moss, Crowder, and Thomas don't come through this year, it will be another long season on defense.

On offense, we are getting Hamilton and Nalen back, but who knows how much they have left. Nalen is coming off of a serious injury. I hope he can step in and pick up where he left off. Hamilton is overrated IMO and one concussion away from retirement. Clady is an unknown, and so is the RT spot. The way I see it, the only spot on the offensive line without a huge question mark is at RG with Holland.

The Broncos have done a great job building for the future of our LOS the last 2 years, but this year we still have a ton of question marks. The season could go either way, depending on how the vets come back from injuries, and how the rooks and 2nd year guys develop.


Not only that everything the OLINE does is based on timing and trust of the guy next to you. That take time to build not something that is going to happen IMO by the time the regular season rolls around..

I too have to wonder if Nalen and Hamilton will come back to their old level of play and how long Nalen we be able to play..

The DLine should be better than last year but that should not be hard to do..

Once again it is team work there and one needs to trust the guy next to him to do the job.

How much that will happen remains to be seen. the first part of the season does IMO bode well for DEN, after the bye should be better..

underrated29
05-12-2008, 12:03 PM
can someone post the info from the link. I cant see it.

I hate this computer.

TIA



Please reference above post thanks.............


I feel left out :tsk:

TheReverend
05-12-2008, 12:05 PM
why is it that whenever someone has something less than flattering to say about the broncos, you always say that "they haven't done their research, or they just don't understand". . . ?


is it so tough to accept that some people just don't view the team in the same positive light that you do? including some of us who follow them every bit as closely and understand quite well the moves that they've made? looks to me like just another way that someone's found to validate their own opinion. . .

i agree with ziggy-- none of our additions but robertson have proven that they can be impact players in the NFL. . . . and if boss is an upgrade from a stiff to a warm body, is that really the kind of move that demands attention from national analysts? seriously, you mentioned niko's practice tape-- do you honestly expect that the guys from ESPiN have been reviewing it to see if the broncos deserve a higher ranking? i fully believe that he has the POTENTIAL to help our run efense, just as larsen does, but just proving that he can stick on an NFL roster doesn't guarantee that he can help us win more gamse than we did last year. . .

people always want to throw out the names of players we've added over the offseason as rational for why we should be getting more respect. . . but that completely ignores the fact that every single team in the league added guys over the offseason. . . sure, this team has talent, and a chance to be good-- so does everyone else. . .

I don't think it's hard to see that every "position of weakness" is a much clearer picture than last seasons reality.

Our defensive line sees an above average starter inserted into the lineup along with the progression of 3 rookies. Worst case scenario is running last years starters who should play better with another years experience under their belt.

Our offensive line sees the return of Ben Hamilton and Tom Nalen... our top 2 offensive linemen over the past decade, along with a top tier LT prospect.

LB was a gaping hole last season, and we have two solid coverage LBs and 2 down thumper in the middle.

Safety got 2 new players with significant starting experience added for depth.

The defense also shifts to a one-gap system that is extremely complementary to personnel and the QB driving the bus on O will now be treated for his Type 1 diabetes...

MOST IMPORTANTLY, Mike has endured heaps of criticism over the past year. If you take the best offensive mind in football, and back him into a corner with poorly written articles and thoughts about he's lost his touch, the end result is an absolutely offensive clinic. Grab a notepad and take notes, this team goes deep into the playoffs.

Not sure how anyone can be down on this team.

dogfish
05-12-2008, 12:05 PM
Please reference above post thanks.............


I feel left out :tsk:



lol. . . . here ya go homes. . .



1 (1) Patriots 16-0-0 A healthy Tom Brady and a happy Randy Moss make the Patriots championship contenders this season and for years to come. (MS)
2 (2) Colts 13-3-0 They haven't had a lot of offseason turnover and they already were very good. Continuity means a lot. (PY)
3 (6) Chargers 11-5-0 If the Chargers can get over their injury issues, they could be in the Super Bowl mix all the way to Tampa. (BW)
4 (3) Cowboys 13-3-0 Felix Jones should help the running game immediately. But who will emerge as the No. 2 receiver? Patrick Crayton wasn't up to the task in late '07. (MM)
5 (4) Jaguars 11-5-0 They sometimes get overshadowed by division rival Indianapolis, but the Jaguars have an elite roster and an elite coach in Jack Del Rio. (PY)
6 (9) Giants 10-6-0 Teams other than the Patriots aren't supposed to repeat as Super Bowl champions. Will Michael Strahan retire? Can they compensate for free-agent losses at LB? (MM)
7 (8) Steelers 10-6-0 A very strong draft catapults the Steelers into Super Bowl contenders. RBs Willie Parker and Rashard Mendenhall should be one of the best 1-2 punches. (JW)
8 (7) Seahawks 10-6-0 New O-line coach Mike Solari stands out as the Seahawks' top offseason acquisition, perhaps allowing them to keep their edge in the NFC West. (MS)
9 (13) Browns 10-6-0 The 2007 darlings face high expectations. The offense will score. Can the D, anchored by additions Shaun Rogers and Corey Williams, hold up its end? (JW)
10 (5) Packers 13-3-0 This is an unpredictable team in the wake of the retirement of Brett Favre. Who will step up and make the big plays this year? (JW)
11 (18) Saints 7-9-0 The offense already was very good. Defensive improvements will make the Saints one of this year's biggest turnarounds. (PY)
12 (15) Vikings 8-8-0 If they settle on a QB, the Vikes could become a playoff team. RB Adrian Peterson is at the top of the list for MVP candidates. (JW)
13 (14) Eagles 8-8-0 Last season, they hit their stride when it was too late. With a fully healed Donovan McNabb and an improved secondary, the Eagles could be dangerous. (MM)
14 (10) Redskins 9-7-0 Too many questions: a new coach, young QB and a pair of rookie WRs. Hard to get a good read. (MM)
15 (12) Buccaneers 9-7-0 They didn't make any splash offseason moves. But RB Warrick Dunn's return is going to help more than many recognize. (PY)
16 (11) Titans 10-6-0 They didn't get as much help from QB Vince Young as they should have. But he's going to become good enough to carry the offense. (PY)
17 (17) Cardinals 8-8-0 Ken Whisenhunt and staff changed the culture in Arizona. Kurt Warner provides top-notch insurance at QB. Depth along the O-line and on defense in general remain the question. (MS)
18 (23) Panthers 7-9-0 The return of QB Jake Delhomme might be enough to get them to the playoffs. But there are no guarantees with Tommy John surgery. (PY)
19 (19) Bills 7-9-0 Marcus Stroud turns 30 this summer and his starts have declined over three seasons. Will he be healthy enough to help the Bills in December? (MS)
20 (16) Texans 8-8-0 They reached respectability in 2007. Improving will be difficult because their division is so tough. (PY)
21 (30) Jets 4-12-0 An offseason spending spree upgraded the roster without answering the Jets' most pressing question: Do they have the right QB? (MS)
22 (25) Ravens 5-11-0 Are the 2008 Ravens more like the 13-3 team in 2006, or the 5-11 unit last season? This is certain: QB play is key. (JW)
23 (21) Broncos 7-9-0 This is the second-best team in the AFC West. That is an indictment of the division, not a pat on the back for this team, which has many holes. (BW)
24 (20) Bears 7-9-0 Seems like ages ago the Bears were NFC champs. For better or worse, fans will have to endure another season of good Rex Grossman and bad Rex Grossman. (JW)
25 (22) Bengals 7-9-0 If WR Chad Johnson sits out, the Bengals will suffer. If Johnson shows, he's a distraction. Neither situation is good. (JW)
26 (27) Raiders 4-12-0 The Raiders' offense won't make people sick anymore, but their defense might. (BW)
27 (26) 49ers 5-11-0 New offensive coordinator Mike Martz provides credibility on offense, but head coach Mike Nolan still must prove he can manage the team more smoothly. (MS)
28 (29) Rams 3-13-0 Quietly, Jim Haslett has turned the defense into a respectable unit. The Rams could contend for a playoff spot if their offensive line can keep Marc Bulger healthy. (MS)
29 (24) Lions 7-9-0 QB Jon Kitna says it will be a disappointment if the Lions don't win 10 games this season. Perhaps he doesn't realize Detroit hasn't won 10 games since 1995. (JW)
30 (28) Chiefs 4-12-0 The Chiefs' rebuilding project has begun, but it's unrealistic to believe they will become contenders anytime soon. (BW)
31 (32) Dolphins 1-15-0 A rookie head coach and an unsettled QB situation add up to growing pains, even though the Dolphins have upgraded their talent base. (MS)
32 (31) Falcons 4-12-0 New coach Mike Smith is the right guy to turn this team around, but it's going to take a few years. (PY)

lex
05-12-2008, 12:49 PM
The people who voted in this pool:
• Mike Sando on the AFC East and NFC West - Pacific Northwest
• James Walker on the AFC North and NFC North - Ohio
• Pat Yasinskas on the AFC South and NFC South - Charlotte
• Bill Williamson on the AFC West - Denver via the north (Minnesota, Wisconsin)
• Matt Mosley on the NFC East - Dallas
• John Clayton - Seattle
• Jeremy Green - Ohio

Sorry, just failing to see the East Coast Bias.

1) I was responding to a general observation; 2) what I said can apply to what your pointing out.

shank
05-12-2008, 01:00 PM
we fix our two biggest needs at DT and OT and add lots of depth to a team that was devistated by injuries last year and they drop us in the rankings below where we finished last year?

these rankings will be easy to prove wrong, but lets hope the broncos play gets whoever made this fired.

MOtorboat
05-12-2008, 01:04 PM
we fix our two biggest needs at DT and OT and add lots of depth to a team that was devistated by injuries last year and they drop us in the rankings below where we finished last year?

these rankings will be easy to prove wrong, but lets hope the broncos play gets whoever made this fired.

We THINK we have them fixed...

dogfish
05-12-2008, 01:06 PM
I don't think it's hard to see that every "position of weakness" is a much clearer picture than last seasons reality.

Our defensive line sees an above average starter inserted into the lineup along with the progression of 3 rookies. Worst case scenario is running last years starters who should play better with another years experience under their belt.

Our offensive line sees the return of Ben Hamilton and Tom Nalen... our top 2 offensive linemen over the past decade, along with a top tier LT prospect.

LB was a gaping hole last season, and we have two solid coverage LBs and 2 down thumper in the middle.

Safety got 2 new players with significant starting experience added for depth.

The defense also shifts to a one-gap system that is extremely complementary to personnel and the QB driving the bus on O will now be treated for his Type 1 diabetes...

MOST IMPORTANTLY, Mike has endured heaps of criticism over the past year. If you take the best offensive mind in football, and back him into a corner with poorly written articles and thoughts about he's lost his touch, the end result is an absolutely offensive clinic. Grab a notepad and take notes, this team goes deep into the playoffs.

Not sure how anyone can be down on this team.



shit. . . i just typed out a really lengthy and in-depth response, and when i went to post it i got "internet explorer cannot display this page". . .

:frusty: :lol:


if i've got some time later maybe i'll re-type all of it. . . . :tsk:

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 01:07 PM
we fix our two biggest needs at DT and OT and add lots of depth to a team that was devistated by injuries last year and they drop us in the rankings below where we finished last year?

these rankings will be easy to prove wrong, but lets hope the broncos play gets whoever made this fired.


Your partially correct here we have attempted to fix the two biggest needs DT and OT, It remains to be seen if they patches hold or if leaks spring out somewhere else on those two units..

These rankings could also be high. When they did the final rankings last year, we had a super hot WR now he is damaged goods..
remember many other teams have went about fixing their holes also.. that is also factored in.

MOtorboat
05-12-2008, 01:09 PM
MOST IMPORTANTLY, Mike has endured heaps of criticism over the past year. If you take the best offensive mind in football, and back him into a corner with poorly written articles and thoughts about he's lost his touch, the end result is an absolutely offensive clinic. Grab a notepad and take notes, this team goes deep into the playoffs.

Not sure how anyone can be down on this team.

:pound:

Yup, that's why Mike's doing it! It's the media!

People's hatred of the media is so laughable...

Natedog24
05-12-2008, 01:14 PM
shit. . . i just typed out a really lengthy and in-depth response, and when i went to post it i got "internet explorer cannot display this page". . .

:frusty: :lol:


if i've got some time later maybe i'll re-type all of it. . . . :tsk:

http://ephemeraleuphoria.com/pictures/firefox_logo.jpg

The solution to what is ailing you

Medford Bronco
05-12-2008, 01:16 PM
We THINK we have them fixed...

I still think our run defense sucks, until proven otherwise

I am still baffled by not picking any defense in the draft until round 4, when that was CLEARLY our biggest need on this team

(MB not venting at you, just used your post to express my thoughts)

lex
05-12-2008, 01:16 PM
:pound:

Yup, that's why Mike's doing it! It's the media!

People's hatred of the media is so laughable...

No. Whats laughable is how you take all criticism of the media personally when no one is really commenting on you. I mean, yeah, this might be your profession, but its highly doubtful that you're influencing what people complaing about in a negative way.

Medford Bronco
05-12-2008, 01:16 PM
:pound:

Yup, that's why Mike's doing it! It's the media!

People's hatred of the media is so laughable...

Yes the media made Mike draft sucky from 2003-2005 for the most part :pound:

MOtorboat
05-12-2008, 01:26 PM
No. Whats laughable is how you take all criticism of the media personally when no one is really commenting on you. I mean, yeah, this might be your profession, but its highly doubtful that you're influencing what people complaing about in a negative way.

No, I just know that people like you don't really have any clue what is going on in the media.

Do I take it personally that you hate ESPN? No...not really, I find it kind of funny, actually. Especially since you keep reading it.

TheReverend
05-12-2008, 01:27 PM
shit. . . i just typed out a really lengthy and in-depth response, and when i went to post it i got "internet explorer cannot display this page". . .

:frusty: :lol:


if i've got some time later maybe i'll re-type all of it. . . . :tsk:

Take your time, I've been similarly owned by lack of connectivity before.

lex
05-12-2008, 01:28 PM
No, I just know that people like you don't really have any clue what is going on in the media.

Do you like sausage?


Do I take it personally that you hate ESPN? No...not really, I find it kind of funny, actually. Especially since you keep reading it.
No, its pretty obvious that you take it personally. Youve become a one man crusade trying to provide equal time on the media's behalf.

TheReverend
05-12-2008, 01:29 PM
I still think our run defense sucks, until proven otherwise

I am still baffled by not picking any defense in the draft until round 4, when that was CLEARLY our biggest need on this team

(MB not venting at you, just used your post to express my thoughts)

Can you explain how a run defense works and why last years was subpar?

Because if you could you'd see the horizon with a smile.

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 01:31 PM
Yes the media made Mike draft sucky from 2000-2005 for the most part :pound:


edited for accuracy IMO

TheReverend
05-12-2008, 01:31 PM
No, I just know that people like you don't really have any clue what is going on in the media.

Do I take it personally that you hate ESPN? No...not really, I find it kind of funny, actually. Especially since you keep reading it.

Ummm, you mean how they get to keep their jobs based on ratings/how many newspapers sell? So they make up some Dove Valley drama that Mike is on the hotseat, despite all evidence to the contrary from Pat Bowlen, and spin facts to highlight shortcomings. I'm pretty sure that IS how the media works.

shank
05-12-2008, 01:33 PM
i should have said 'filled' our two biggest needs.

i realize other teams have improved, but i think we will be better this year than last, and they have us dropping even further. if we can avoid injuries, this ranking is too low imo.

if this year goes like last year in regards to injuries and inconsistency, then it may be accurate, so i guess they may factor trends into their rankings as welll?

O-ManePunisher
05-12-2008, 01:34 PM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7YxTWo56lUs
Well then i guess there's only one thing to do...
WIN THE WHOLE ******* THING

topscribe
05-12-2008, 01:34 PM
They are looking at last year's team. Last year, yes, that is probably where
they should rank.

This year, maybe a little closer to the middle of the pack . . . until some
questions are answered. For instance, will Marshall and Henry have the full
use of their hands this year? Will Niko work out at MLB, or Larsen step in (but
he's a rookie)? Can Lynch play at a high level for one more year? Does Nalen
still have it? How about Robertson? Is Ekuban back? How fast will the Ol gel?

IF eveything goes well, I look for the Broncos to finish out the season as a
top five team. If not . . . well, middle of the pack, or maybe even where they
are now.

This year is really an enigma. I don't know whether the Broncos will be
taking the 3rd selection or the 30th in next year's draft. :confused:

-----

MOtorboat
05-12-2008, 01:38 PM
Ummm, you mean how they get to keep their jobs based on ratings/how many newspapers sell? So they make up some Dove Valley drama that Mike is on the hotseat, despite all evidence to the contrary from Pat Bowlen, and spin facts to highlight shortcomings. I'm pretty sure that IS how the media works.

There are a number of fans asking why he's still the coach. They are asking why he has so much job security. See it every day on this board.

So, they ask the question, get the answer, put it out there. And you criticize them for asking a question that many fans want to know the answer to.

Or, are your referring to columns...opinion pieces that are not news? I suppose if they don't hold your opinion, or they don't say Denver is going to be 19-0 and Shanahan is a genius, the writer's an idiot.

TheReverend
05-12-2008, 01:41 PM
There are a number of fans asking why he's still the coach. They are asking why he has so much job security. See it every day on this board.

So, they ask the question, get the answer, put it out there. And you criticize them for asking a question that many fans want to know the answer to.

Or, are your referring to columns...opinion pieces that are not news? I suppose if they don't hold your opinion, or they don't say Denver is going to be 19-0 and Shanahan is a genius, the writer's an idiot.

Absolutely. They're all retarded. The world shouldn't have to hold the hands of idiots while everyone else wants to move forward.

This is capitalism, not elementary school's "no child left behind".

They can either try to catch on and keep up, or bask in their own mental incapacity.

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 01:43 PM
They are looking at last year's team. Last year, yes, that is probably where
they should rank.

This year, maybe a little closer to the middle of the pack . . . until some
questions are answered. For instance, will Marshall and Henry have the full
use of their hands this year? Will Niko work out at MLB, or Larsen step in (but
he's a rookie)? Can Lynch play at a high level for one more year? Does Nalen
still have it? How about Robertson? Is Ekuban back? How fast will the Ol gel?

IF eveything goes well, I look for the Broncos to finish out the season as a
top five team. If not . . . well, middle of the pack, or maybe even where they
are now.

This year is really an enigma. I don't know whether the Broncos will be
taking the 3rd selection or the 30th in next year's draft. :confused:

-----

before the BYE we will struggle IMO and after unless the grim reaper strikes again It should be smother sailings, but still not .500 IMO.

MOtorboat
05-12-2008, 01:44 PM
Absolutely. They're all retarded. The world shouldn't have to hold the hands of idiots while everyone else wants to move forward.

This is capitalism, not elementary school's "no child left behind".

They can either try to catch on and keep up, or bask in their own mental incapacity.

So they are retarded for not thinking we're a Top 10 Team, Top 5 on the high-end...

OK...wow...:eek:

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 01:46 PM
There are a number of fans asking why he's still the coach. They are asking why he has so much job security. See it every day on this board.

So, they ask the question, get the answer, put it out there. And you criticize them for asking a question that many fans want to know the answer to.

Or, are your referring to columns...opinion pieces that are not news? I suppose if they don't hold your opinion, or they don't say Denver is going to be 19-0 and Shanahan is a genius, the writer's an idiot.


actually most have been asking why is he still the GM the guy in charge of making the final decisions on personnel.. Very few have suggested he is a lousy coach and therefore fired..

Fan in Exile
05-12-2008, 01:47 PM
why is it that whenever someone has something less than flattering to say about the broncos, you always say that "they haven't done their research, or they just don't understand". . . ?


is it so tough to accept that some people just don't view the team in the same positive light that you do? including some of us who follow them every bit as closely and understand quite well the moves that they've made? looks to me like just another way that someone's found to validate their own opinion. . .

i agree with ziggy-- none of our additions but robertson have proven that they can be impact players in the NFL. . . . and if boss is an upgrade from a stiff to a warm body, is that really the kind of move that demands attention from national analysts? seriously, you mentioned niko's practice tape-- do you honestly expect that the guys from ESPiN have been reviewing it to see if the broncos deserve a higher ranking? i fully believe that he has the POTENTIAL to help our run efense, just as larsen does, but just proving that he can stick on an NFL roster doesn't guarantee that he can help us win more gamse than we did last year. . .

people always want to throw out the names of players we've added over the offseason as rational for why we should be getting more respect. . . but that completely ignores the fact that every single team in the league added guys over the offseason. . . sure, this team has talent, and a chance to be good-- so does everyone else. . .

Dogfish oh how you are wrong let me count the ways. There have only been two times that I've said "they haven't done their research, or they just don't understand." Both times I backed it up with outside sources, so this is just a straw man argument.

Next the post you quoted wasn't in response to the ESPN ranking it was in response to Ziggy who said they hadn't proven anything.

If you look at my first response I said that I probably wouldn't change the ESPN ranking. So your whole rant about me being more positive than some is entirely in your own mind and it would help if you paid attention to what I actually post. Clearly you were trying to put me in my place but since you couldn't get your facts straight that didn't happen, and I have less respect for your opinion now than I used to.

No I don't expect ESPN to review Niko's practice tape. But I do expect that our FO reviewed everything they could get their hands on and that's how Niko proved himself. He better have proven more by that than that he can stick to a roster.

I don't know what you mean by impact player but what I expect from Boss is that he will be better than Webster and that he can cover better. I don't expect him to be a superstar or anything like that. He proved that much at Detroit. Only an idiot would expect every player brought in to be a superstar, because every team is going to have role players on it.

Cugel
05-12-2008, 01:52 PM
The first requirement is that theyre from the new england area. Seriously, a large portion of their staff really is from that area and its been observed by on-air "talent" as well as Hank Steinbrenner. The national media is concentrated in the east. And in more recent years, the media has started playing more towards larger cities. This has resulted in an alarming decline in due diligence on their part.

So its a combination of things. 1) where the national media is concentrated; 2) that region also has a high concentration of schools many consider to be reputable...you could have two schools that are the same but if its east its more likely to be recognizable; 3) local media in places like Denver are often overcome with hacks who play to the national media...they have their own aspirations. So the net effect is the local guys tell the national guys what they want to hear. It happens here in Chicago all the time. Case in point, very few Cubs fans I know actually believe in curses...thats more interesting to guys in placed like Bristol CT and so if you want to get on E!SPN and youre a local guy, you start saying things like the curse is valid.

In this case, your entire claim got shot to the ground! :coffee:

ESPN TELL YOU exactly who is responsible for each prediction: "• Bill Williamson on the AFC West" Notice the Broncos analysis:


#3 "If the Chargers can get over their injury issues, they could be in the Super Bowl mix all the way to Tampa. (BW)"

#23 "Broncos: This is the second-best team in the AFC West. That is an indictment of the division, not a pat on the back for this team, which has many holes. (BW)"

#25 "The Raiders' offense won't make people sick anymore, but their defense might. (BW)"

#30 "The Chiefs' rebuilding project has begun, but it's unrealistic to believe they will become contenders anytime soon. (BW)"

Well, he's right. The Broncos DO have many holes. They've plugged these holes with new players, but how well they do is anybody's guess right now. They have virtually NO proven talent, lots of "promise" and "potential."

Well, that and $3.49 can get you a mocha-latte at Starbucks. :coffee:

Will Marcus Thomas, Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder be better this year?

Will Cutler perform better in his 3rd season or back-slide?

Will any of the WRs prove adequate to replace Javon Walker?

Can John Lynch hold up for another year and will the other safeties be able to do the job?

Can the LBs corps settle in? Will Koutivides, Bailey and D.J. Williams actually be better than last year's group with Ian Gold at WLB?

Can Travis Henry stay healthy and out of trouble? Can any of the other RBs handle the load if he's injured? Or will they be injured and unavailable as well?

Don't tell me your OPINIONS about all these things! I know that you want to "believe" everything is going to be great. And maybe it will. But, as of now, a NON-HOMER objective view of the Broncos is "a lot of holes and uncertain how the parts will fit."

And that's the truth. You can be as optimistic as you like, but don't expect a national sports magazine to "root" for the Broncos by taking the most optimistic possible view of things just because you do! :coffee:

Dreadnought
05-12-2008, 01:57 PM
I don't know if I would place the Broncos too much higher than this myself, however the commentary really shows how little they know about the Broncos' off-season moves. We really don't have that many holes right now. We've got some questions but few holes. It's such a generic line that it makes me wonder if they actually bothered to look at the Broncos offseason moves at all.

I thought it was pure ESPN style hackery. That useless network continually does a poor job at what they do, and this is no exception - not just for the Bronos either.

TheReverend
05-12-2008, 02:01 PM
In this case, your entire claim got shot to the ground! :coffee:

ESPN TELL YOU exactly who is responsible for each prediction: "• Bill Williamson on the AFC West" Notice the Broncos analysis:


Well, he's right. The Broncos DO have many holes. They've plugged these holes with new players, but how well they do is anybody's guess right now. They have virtually NO proven talent, lots of "promise" and "potential."

Well, that and $3.49 can get you a mocha-latte at Starbucks. :coffee:

Will Marcus Thomas, Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder be better this year?

There's nothing homer about understanding that a years worth of football slows down the speed of the NFL game and it'll be nearly impossible for them not to improve based on that alone. Factor in another seasons worth of camps and a single gap system and the answer is flat out "yes"

Will Cutler perform better in his 3rd season or back-slide?

Show me one QB under Mike Shanahan that didn't dramatically improve his 3rd year. Don't forget this guy lost 30 lbs due to untreated diabetes...

Will any of the WRs prove adequate to replace Javon Walker?

Javon who? I only ask because I can barely remember the last time he made an impact for the ball club... did he dominate last year or something?

Can John Lynch hold up for another year and will the other safeties be able to do the job?

The rumors of his decline are grossly exaggerated... when worst case is mixing in 2 safeties who have significant starting experience, you can count this a safe spot.

Can the LBs corps settle in? Will Koutivides, Bailey and D.J. Williams actually be better than last year's group with Ian Gold at WLB?

Prime position of questions... the Bailey over Webster is an upgrade, and I'm not sure it's possible for Niko to play worse than 07 DJ and we get a helmet headset radio.

Can Travis Henry stay healthy and out of trouble? Can any of the other RBs handle the load if he's injured? Or will they be injured and unavailable as well?

Selvin and Hall produced last year when Travis was out with a completely decimated offensive line... do you need water walking?


Don't tell me your OPINIONS about all these things! I know that you want to "believe" everything is going to be great. And maybe it will. But, as of now, a NON-HOMER objective view of the Broncos is "a lot of holes and uncertain how the parts will fit."

And that's the truth. You can be as optimistic as you like, but don't expect a national sports magazine to "root" for the Broncos by taking the most optimistic possible view of things just because you do! :coffee:

....

O-ManePunisher
05-12-2008, 02:11 PM
Who cares if Ive worked at ESPN i'll put the broncos at 23 too...we sucked balls last year,what do you expect a Top 10 Power Rank..Lets just hope the players on the Broncos take this "Power Ranking system" as Motivation...

topscribe
05-12-2008, 02:15 PM
In this case, your entire claim got shot to the ground! :coffee:

ESPN TELL YOU exactly who is responsible for each prediction: "• Bill Williamson on the AFC West" Notice the Broncos analysis:


Well, he's right. The Broncos DO have many holes. They've plugged these holes with new players, but how well they do is anybody's guess right now. They have virtually NO proven talent, lots of "promise" and "potential."

Well, that and $3.49 can get you a mocha-latte at Starbucks. :coffee:

Will Marcus Thomas, Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder be better this year?

Will Cutler perform better in his 3rd season or back-slide?

Will any of the WRs prove adequate to replace Javon Walker?

Can John Lynch hold up for another year and will the other safeties be able to do the job?

Can the LBs corps settle in? Will Koutivides, Bailey and D.J. Williams actually be better than last year's group with Ian Gold at WLB?

Can Travis Henry stay healthy and out of trouble? Can any of the other RBs handle the load if he's injured? Or will they be injured and unavailable as well?



I'm with you on some of this, Cug, but certain of your questions are
unfounded. Such as the improvement of Moss, Thomas, and Crowder. Of
course, they will improve. Moss won't be injured, Thomas said he is in
better shape than last year, and Crowder has a motor that won't quit . . .
and they all have a year under their belts. Why wouldn't they be better?

Why would Cutler backslide? He's a workaholic!! He's smarter, in better
health, and he eats, drinks, and sleeps football. It's the slackers who
backslide: Cutler is no slacker.

Regarding Walker, you are aware that he was projected as the #2 receiver
this year, aren't you? That means he was already replaced. The question
remains as to whether Marshall's hand will heal completely, but as far as
being good enough, you've got to be kidding.

And why would Boss, Niko, and D.J. not be better than Webster, D.J., and
Gold? That seems a bit silly to me, sorry.

You have probably noted from my post that I have a lot of questions. But
I consider them questions, not holes. A hole is something you can see as a
hole, not something that might be there.

Frankly, I don't know yet. I don't know how those who seem to think they
know can come to their conclusions . . . both the overly optimistic and the
overly pessimistic.

Somebody needs to turn in his crystal ball . . . :coffee:

-----

TheReverend
05-12-2008, 02:16 PM
So they are retarded for not thinking we're a Top 10 Team, Top 5 on the high-end...

OK...wow...:eek:

My response was deleted and I'm not sure why... regardless, re-read the post I was replying to and read what I wrote replying to what you wrote... I'm responding to what you said. So read what you said and try not to associate my words with something else entirely. Ok? Okay, goodluck with that.

Kaylore
05-12-2008, 02:20 PM
I kind of agree with both points here. The Broncos are closer to being good than people think. For some reason no one thinks anyone on the team can get better from one year to the next. Its like people think you either have to have a rookie go to the pro-bowl his first year, sign a veteran who is a pro-bowler (and we all know they let them go, right? :rolleyes:) or else the team will be exactly as it was the year before.

Crowder, Moss, and Thomas will all be better next year in one degree or another. Even Harris might surprise and compete. Cutler is going to be awesome. Our receivers are going to do better than people think, even with numb-nuts almost cutting his arm off. I really think we'll surprise some people.

That said, I don't blame the media at all for ranking us this low. People that take a passing glance at our team probably think we're on the decline. I could see how someone would think that. Respect is earned and we lost a lot last season. I just hope the other teams believe the hype.

BOSSHOGG30
05-12-2008, 02:31 PM
I think with the questions we have with Culter, the running game, Marshall, the O-line, the new offensive and defensive coordinators, the kicker, the punter, the shuffle at linebacker, the age and talent at safety, and just the fact we are in the AFC, I can see why were are ranked so low. I think we are a middle of the pack team give or take.

lex
05-12-2008, 02:37 PM
The first requirement is that theyre from the new england area. Seriously, a large portion of their staff really is from that area and its been observed by on-air "talent" as well as Hank Steinbrenner. The national media is concentrated in the east. And in more recent years, the media has started playing more towards larger cities. This has resulted in an alarming decline in due diligence on their part.

So its a combination of things. 1) where the national media is concentrated; 2) that region also has a high concentration of schools many consider to be reputable...you could have two schools that are the same but if its east its more likely to be recognizable; 3) local media in places like Denver are often overcome with hacks who play to the national media...they have their own aspirations. So the net effect is the local guys tell the national guys what they want to hear. It happens here in Chicago all the time. Case in point, very few Cubs fans I know actually believe in curses...thats more interesting to guys in placed like Bristol CT and so if you want to get on E!SPN and youre a local guy, you start saying things like the curse is valid.


In this case, your entire claim got shot to the ground! :coffee:

ESPN TELL YOU exactly who is responsible for each prediction: "• Bill Williamson on the AFC West" Notice the Broncos analysis:



Here you go. As we speak E!SPN probably has each team slotted in their production meetings.

topscribe
05-12-2008, 02:41 PM
I think with the questions we have with Culter, the running game, Marshall, the O-line, the new offensive and defensive coordinators, the kicker, the punter, the shuffle at linebacker, the age and talent at safety, and just the fact we are in the AFC, I can see why were are ranked so low. I think we are a middle of the pack team give or take.

Most of this, yes. But what questions are there with Cutler? :confused:

So many are talking about questions with Cutler. The guy has 21 regular
season games under his belt with an 88.5 QB rating. What questions remain??

-----

Astrass
05-12-2008, 03:09 PM
I know it's only May and I don't really know what to expect from the Broncos this year. But I don't think they're that bad.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking?season=2008&week=0

I agree with that spot. We earned it and we have to prove we are better. The draft doesn't mean anything till we get on the field and see what we're made of.

corona
05-12-2008, 03:24 PM
The majority of their reporters are from other areas. At least on-air NFL guys. Mortensen is from Arkansas, Rinaldi is from Dallas. Rachel Nichols from California. Sal is from Philadelphia, which is approaching the northeast, so I'm failing to see where their on-air NFL guys are just from the northeast.

They have a NFL columnist from Denver...(though I've found that on here, most people don't like him).

Morensen may be from Arkansas but I know for a fact he leaves in Colorado Springs two streets down, I have seen him at the Safeway a few times as well as driving.

MOtorboat
05-12-2008, 03:26 PM
Morensen may be from Arkansas but I know for a fact he leaves in Colorado Springs two streets down, I have seen him at the Safeway a few times as well as driving.

You mean he's not from Boston?

Lonestar
05-12-2008, 03:29 PM
You mean he's not from Boston?

Nah the just "leaves in Colorado Springs" usually in the fall.. :D

Ziggy
05-12-2008, 03:34 PM
Most of this, yes. But what questions are there with Cutler? :confused:

So many are talking about questions with Cutler. The guy has 21 regular
season games under his belt with an 88.5 QB rating. What questions remain??

-----

I think the questions about Cutler may be coming about because of his diagnosis of Diabetes. Many people don't understand what effects diabetes has on every day life because they are not familiar with it. Cutler is an intelligent workaholic, which tells me that he will probably manage this disease properly. If he does, he will eat healthy, moniter his blood sugar regularly, and his on field performance will actually improve. His body was holding him back last year. He said himself that he often came back to the huddle out of breath. He'll be stronger, faster, and his body will actually do what it has the capability of doing (making the long passes, throwing it on a rope when needed, and being able to give maximum physical effort on every play. After seeing how he did last season with the condition he was in, I'm amazed. I think he shows America this season that he is an elite NFL QB.

Bronco Yoda
05-12-2008, 03:36 PM
PUleeeeeeease!

Saints, Bucs, Redskins, Cards, Jets over the Broncos?

Yah, we have no kicking game left, O-line will be wearing name tags until Nov and Cutler has a blood booboo...... but give me a break. Shanahan would beat these above teams 2 out of 3 times with his evil rat-grin and the practice squad.

Mike
05-12-2008, 03:44 PM
PUleeeeeeease!

Saints, Bucs, Redskins, Cards, Jets over the Broncos?

Yah, we have no kicking game left, O-line will be wearing name tags until Nov and Cutler has a blood booboo...... but give me a break. Shanahan would beat these above teams 2 out of 3 times with his evil rat-grin and the practice squad.

Well, the way they played last year it is no surprise you left the biggest weakness...the _efense....out of the post. ;)

I don't think Denver could beat Saints or Bucs right now...and think it would be a toss up at best between the Cards and Skins. They could probably beat the Jets though.

BOSSHOGG30
05-12-2008, 03:47 PM
PUleeeeeeease!

Saints, Bucs, Redskins, Cards, Jets over the Broncos?

Yah, we have no kicking game left, O-line will be wearing name tags until Nov and Cutler has a blood booboo...... but give me a break. Shanahan would beat these above teams 2 out of 3 times with his evil rat-grin and the practice squad.

Saints, Bucs, Redskins, and Cards are all in the NFC... the NFC is up for grabs every year. The AFC is so good that you have to bank on at least a 10 win season to make the playoffs. You don't need that many wins in the NFC. I can see any of those NFC teams making the playoffs. I don't however see the Broncos making the playoffs.

Dreadnought
05-12-2008, 03:49 PM
Well, the way they played last year it is no surprise you left the biggest weakness...the _efense....out of the post. ;)

I don't think Denver could beat Saints or Bucs right now...and think it would be a toss up at best between the Cards and Skins. They could probably beat the Jets though.

Eh, I'd give you that the Saints are a better club right now, but none of the rest of those guys. They all have at least as many holes as we do IMO, and we had a more hellacious run of injuries last year than average. Skins and Bucs probably on par (though I still think our upside prospects are better); Cards I don't believe in, and the J-E-T-S are a mess.

BroncoFanatic
05-12-2008, 03:49 PM
Being ranked at #23 just leaves us more room to move up :salute:

Mike
05-12-2008, 03:52 PM
Eh, I'd give you that the Saints are a better club right now, but none of the rest of those guys. They all have at least as many holes as we do IMO, and we had a more hellacious run of injuries last year than average. Skins and Bucs probably on par (though I still think our upside prospects are better); Cards I don't believe in, and the J-E-T-S are a mess.

I agree. I see no real reason to fault them for placing the Broncos there because between those teams it is really all the same...a toss up.

lex
05-12-2008, 04:05 PM
Just think how accurate something like this would have been last year where everyone was down on teams like Cleveland, Jacksonville or Tampa Bay and big on Baltimore or New Orleans. Its silly.

Broncospsycho77
05-12-2008, 04:53 PM
In reality, I kind of like this ranking. Maybe this year we can pull our own little "Cleveland Browns" saga type of thing.

Let's face it; we got this rating because we're simply unproven. There are significant questions still with defensive line, especially at tackle with mid-tier talent, offensive line, especially with a rookie starting at left tackle, running back, where the job is never a finality until Week 1, quarterback, where JC is working on gaining heinous amounts of weight back, wide receiver, where questions arise about the ego of Brandon Marshall, fragility of Stokley, and potential of Eddie Royal, and linebacker, where a Special Teamer will take the reins of a brand new corps. There are plenty of uncertainties across the board, and the less the media knows about the talent, the better.

In all reality, 23rd isn't a bad thing for a May mock-up.

topscribe
05-12-2008, 04:59 PM
In reality, I kind of like this ranking. Maybe this year we can pull our own little "Cleveland Browns" saga type of thing.

Let's face it; we got this rating because we're simply unproven. There are significant questions still with defensive line, especially at tackle with mid-tier talent, offensive line, especially with a rookie starting at left tackle, running back, where the job is never a finality until Week 1, quarterback, where JC is working on gaining heinous amounts of weight back, wide receiver, where questions arise about the ego of Brandon Marshall, fragility of Stokley, and potential of Eddie Royal, and linebacker, where a Special Teamer will take the reins of a brand new corps. There are plenty of uncertainties across the board, and the less the media knows about the talent, the better.

In all reality, 23rd isn't a bad thing for a May mock-up.

You have a point there.

I hope the rankings stay down, and the Broncos enter the season with a chip on their shoulder . . .

-----

Bronco Yoda
05-12-2008, 05:18 PM
Well, the way they played last year it is no surprise you left the biggest weakness...the _efense....out of the post. ;)

I don't think Denver could beat Saints or Bucs right now...and think it would be a toss up at best between the Cards and Skins. They could probably beat the Jets though.

I'm actually positive on our D this year as long as we stick with a common sense scheme. It's our Offensive chem and Special Teams I'm more worried about. No ESPN love and respect for Champ, Bly, Lynch? DJ is going to be so much better with his added experience. Niko is going to be solid. Like the addition to the line. I'm sensing a good thing from this Bailey brother connection.

All this Saints love is hollow. Now the Bucs I can see the arguement. Cards are paper tigers.... skins? no. The Jets ranking is just silly.

This kind of ranking tells me just one thing. Mike Shanahan has lost all credibility and benefit of the doubt with the talking heads. like that's worth anything....

Nature Boy
05-12-2008, 05:23 PM
I hope Broncos ranks stay down too. Better against the spread.

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 05:41 PM
I really don't care how they are ranked because it really doesn't mean anything until the season is over.

3090
05-12-2008, 05:45 PM
I'm actually positive on our D this year as long as we stick with a common sense scheme. It's our Offensive chem and Special Teams I'm more worried about. No ESPN love and respect for Champ, Bly, Lynch? DJ is going to be so much better with his added experience. Niko is going to be solid. Like the addition to the line. I'm sensing a good thing from this Bailey brother connection.

All this Saints love is hollow. Now the Bucs I can see the arguement. Cards are paper tigers.... skins? no. The Jets ranking is just silly.

This kind of ranking tells me just one thing. Mike Shanahan has lost all credibility and benefit of the doubt with the talking heads. like that's worth anything....

The Saints are eerily similar to the Broncos IMO. They will both surprise in 08/09.

Both teams did a good job of addressing holes with bargain FAs and solid drafts.

The Saints needed help on D and invested in the most important part of any D. Right up the middle. Ellis, Vilma, and Harper is not a bad center-line to build around. Add in their DE strengths with Charles Grant and Will Smith...along with backup DE McCray and backup LB Dan Morgan and you have a potentially good to great D.

They were already good on O...and IF they can stay healthy with Duece and Robert Meecham...this is a playoff caliber team.

Tned
05-12-2008, 05:46 PM
I kind of agree with both points here. The Broncos are closer to being good than people think. For some reason no one thinks anyone on the team can get better from one year to the next. Its like people think you either have to have a rookie go to the pro-bowl his first year, sign a veteran who is a pro-bowler (and we all know they let them go, right? :rolleyes:) or else the team will be exactly as it was the year before.

Crowder, Moss, and Thomas will all be better next year in one degree or another. Even Harris might surprise and compete. Cutler is going to be awesome. Our receivers are going to do better than people think, even with numb-nuts almost cutting his arm off. I really think we'll surprise some people.

That said, I don't blame the media at all for ranking us this low. People that take a passing glance at our team probably think we're on the decline. I could see how someone would think that. Respect is earned and we lost a lot last season. I just hope the other teams believe the hype.

I think the ranking, based on the last two years trend is understandable, but I don't personally think we will be anywhere near 21 or 23 on the in season power rankings.

Assuming numb-nuts arm is healed (it will be a big blow if Marshall ruined his arm), I expect to see a much better showing than the previous two years. Granted, there are some big question marks, such as will Clady be able to take over and perform well at LT, how strong will our WR corp be, how will our LB's do, but all and all, I expect the defense to be much better than last year (Bates is gone for a reason) and if Cutler is given even halfway decent protection, and has healthy receivers to throw to, I think the offense will surprise some of the people doing the power rankings.

Inkana7
05-12-2008, 05:46 PM
There is no way in HELL we are worse than the Jets.

frauschieze
05-12-2008, 05:48 PM
I remember this time of year last year, there were people ready to crown the defense the second coming of the Orange Crush. We all know how that turned out. Just like last year, I'm not ready to give anyone anything, but remain optimistic with a healthy dose of skepticism. We won't know anything until we take to the field.

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 06:00 PM
Most of this, yes. But what questions are there with Cutler? :confused:

So many are talking about questions with Cutler. The guy has 21 regular
season games under his belt with an 88.5 QB rating. What questions remain??

-----

If I were to guess Boss is talking about Jay's diabetes and not his ability to preform.

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 06:01 PM
I remember this time of year last year, there were people ready to crown the defense the second coming of the Orange Crush. We all know how that turned out. Just like last year, I'm not ready to give anyone anything, but remain optimistic with a healthy dose of skepticism. We won't know anything until we take to the field.

Exactly Frau I couldn't agree more.

Bronco Yoda
05-12-2008, 06:04 PM
Saints, Bucs, Redskins, and Cards are all in the NFC... the NFC is up for grabs every year. The AFC is so good that you have to bank on at least a 10 win season to make the playoffs. You don't need that many wins in the NFC. I can see any of those NFC teams making the playoffs. I don't however see the Broncos making the playoffs.

what does any of this have to do with individual power rankings?

Hoshdude7
05-12-2008, 08:12 PM
They ranked the Jets higher?

slim
05-12-2008, 08:22 PM
Meh, take a look at last years preseason rankings and see how they ended up.

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 08:25 PM
They ranked the Jets higher?

I guess they think Jets had a better off season. :noidea:

Hobe
05-12-2008, 08:31 PM
This is really just the one of the first of many predictions about who will win what this coming season. It always gets me how they always pick the Skins, Cards, and Jets to be good this year. Despite a few flashes in pan, they never amount to anything.

The Broncos should have been at least three spots higher.

Northman
05-12-2008, 08:38 PM
Broncos are too low and the Redskins are way too high.

Northman
05-12-2008, 08:38 PM
The Broncos should have been at least three spots higher.



totally agree.

dogfish
05-12-2008, 08:52 PM
I guess they think Jets had a better off season. :noidea:

they're right. . .


personally i'm not convinced that they'll really get a great return for all the money they threw around, and i'm not complaining about our offseason approach, but it's certainly understandable if people like their offseason moves better than ours. . . they did go out and get alan faneca, bubba franks, damien woody, kris jenkins, calvin pace and vernon gholston. . . people (not refering to you, TX) may as well get cozy with the idea that not too many folks besides broncos homers are going to be all that impressed by adding guys like keary colbert and marquand manuel. . . did we address some areas of need? sure, but so did most other teams. . . did we bring in some young talent through the draft? just like 31 other teams did. . .

and ultimately it doesn't matter a bit how teams are ranked-- we all know that you still have to go prove it on the field. . . i can never understand why anyone bothers to get indignant about these things. . . call it the martyr syndrome, i guess. . . maybe we should replace theunder with rodney dangerfield, as much perceived disrespect as we get. . . . :laugh:

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 09:00 PM
they're right. . .


personally i'm not convinced that they'll really get a great return for all the money they threw around, and i'm not complaining about our offseason approach, but it's certainly understandable if people like their offseason moves better than ours. . . they did go out and get alan faneca, bubba franks, damien woody, kris jenkins, calvin pace and vernon gholston. . . people (not refering to you, TX) may as well get cozy with the idea that not too many folks besides broncos homers are going to be all that impressed by adding guys like keary colbert and marquand manuel. . . did we address some areas of need? sure, but so did most other teams. . . did we bring in some young talent through the draft? just like 31 other teams did. . .

and ultimately it doesn't matter a bit how teams are ranked-- we all know that you still have to go prove it on the field. . . i can never understand why anyone bothers to get indignant about these things. . . call it the martyr syndrome, i guess. . . maybe we should replace theunder with rodney dangerfield, as much perceived disrespect as we get. . . . :laugh:

As I said before I've never put any stock in power rankings because power rankings don't win or lose football games.

Northman
05-12-2008, 09:02 PM
I agree. We were pretty high in Rankings last year (at least at certain times) and yet we finished 7-9. They dont always speak as to how good or bad your team is. But the more we fly under the radar the better.

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 09:07 PM
I agree. We were pretty high in Rankings last year (at least at certain times) and yet we finished 7-9. They dont always speak as to how good or bad your team is. But the more we fly under the radar the better.

I agree, look the at Patriots they were at the top of the power rankings the entire year but it didn't win the Super Bowl.

Bronco Yoda
05-12-2008, 09:49 PM
. . . i can never understand why anyone bothers to get indignant about these things. . . call it the martyr syndrome, i guess. . . maybe we should replace theunder with rodney dangerfield, as much perceived disrespect as we get. . . . :laugh:

martyr syndrome?...a little drama-ish don't ya think? Biatching over something as worthless as a meaningless rankings when it's the dead of off season is a god given right in the pigskin man law. You must be fun at tailgaters and sports bar banters. lol

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 09:53 PM
martyr syndrome?...a little drama-ish don't ya think? Biatching over something as worthless as a meaningless rankings when it's the dead of off season is a god given right in the pigskin man law. You must be fun at tailgaters and sports bar banters. lol


Dog is one of the funniest if not the funniest poster I know.

SmilinAssasSin27
05-12-2008, 09:56 PM
a tad bit early for some bogus rankings...

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 09:59 PM
a tad bit early for some bogus rankings...

Why not, we already have a mock draft for 2009.

dogfish
05-12-2008, 10:04 PM
martyr syndrome?...a little drama-ish don't ya think? Biatching over something as worthless as a meaningless rankings when it's the dead of off season is a god given right in the pigskin man law. You must be fun at tailgaters and sports bar banters. lol

i'm usually the guy buyin' the drinks-- nobody complains. . . . :D

SmilinAssasSin27
05-12-2008, 10:19 PM
Why not, we already have a mock draft for 2009.

sweet. who did we get?

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 10:55 PM
sweet. who did we get?


According to Todd McShay:

13. Denver Broncos -- James Laurinaitis, ILB, Ohio State ;)

Stargazer
05-12-2008, 11:49 PM
I agree, look the at Patriots they were at the top of the power rankings the entire year but it didn't win the Super Bowl.

Sure, but there was a reason they were at the top. Went undefeated during the regular season and made it to the SB.

I think in some ways Denver is slotted where they should be. At the bottom 1/3 of the NFL teams. The AFC is a tough conference and to make the playoffs will be difficult. Sure, the power rankings mean squat, but it's hard to see as of today Denver making the top 6 in the AFC.

TXBRONC
05-12-2008, 11:55 PM
Sure, but there was a reason they were at the top. Went undefeated during the regular season and made it to the SB.

I think in some ways Denver is slotted where they should be. At the bottom 1/3 of the NFL teams. The AFC is a tough conference and to make the playoffs will be difficult. Sure, the power rankings mean squat, but it's hard to see as of today Denver making the top 6 in the AFC.

Ok but slotting there didn't get them to Super Bowl and being ranked number one in power rating didn't win them the Super Bowl. The ranking doesn't mean anything.

Stargazer
05-13-2008, 12:04 AM
Ok but slotting there didn't get them to Super Bowl and being ranked number one in power rating didn't win them the Super Bowl. The ranking doesn't mean anything.

Of'course it doesn't mean anything. But, being near the top of the power rankings means they were doing something good and were on a potential track to win the SB. And same with this edition of power rankings. They are definately a team to beat, yet again, this season.

Denver being slotted towards the bottom in this edition of power rankings shouldn't really surprise anyone. There are a lot of question marks with this team going into the upcoming season.

3090
05-13-2008, 12:38 AM
According to Todd McShay:

13. Denver Broncos -- James Laurinaitis, ILB, Ohio State ;)


So does McShay think that Boss or that Niko is going to fail? Not that it matters. Laurinatis will be gone in the top 5.

I am cool with mocks, power rankings, playoff predictions...no matter how early. Take with a grain of salt...but it is football related.

Who does McShay have for our 2010 draft?

Lonestar
05-13-2008, 12:43 AM
So does McShay think that Boss or that Niko is going to fail? Not that it matters. Laurinatis will be gone in the top 5.

I am cool with mocks, power rankings, playoff predictions...no matter how early. Take with a grain of salt...but it is football related.

Who does McShay have for our 2010 draft?

Jack Elway

3090
05-13-2008, 12:54 AM
Jack Elway

Awesome.

That will let the Broncs move Jay over to PK\KR when Royal takes over as the # 1 WR with Marshall gone. :D


Actually it will be interesting to watch Jack at ASU. Carpenter just had hand surgery on his throwing hand...it may open the door for Jack to play.

With the name on the back of the jersey...you know the fans will be calling for it. Just like Chris Simms.

omac
05-13-2008, 01:38 AM
Based on last seasons performance, the only team I have issue with being above us in the rankings are the Jets. All others seem like a fair assesment based on last season.

Timmy!
05-13-2008, 06:59 AM
FYI: Jack Elway will never be a Denver Bronco. That is all.

TXBRONC
05-13-2008, 07:20 AM
So does McShay think that Boss or that Niko is going to fail? Not that it matters. Laurinatis will be gone in the top 5.

I am cool with mocks, power rankings, playoff predictions...no matter how early. Take with a grain of salt...but it is football related.

Who does McShay have for our 2010 draft?

I don't know. I would guess that since we do not have an established Mike linebacker he saw it as our highest priority. He also has us with 13 overall pick which also remains to be seen.

I don't know who McShay has for 2010 I guess he can't see that far into the future.;)

MOtorboat
05-13-2008, 07:29 AM
FYI: Jack Elway will never be a Denver Bronco. That is all.

He'll be redshirted this year and won't be eligible until at least 2011, more likely 2012 anyway....

pilfin
05-13-2008, 08:01 AM
For preseason rankings, it is about what you would expect. The fact is, the Broncos were the 12th worst team in football last year. These rankings have them listed as 10th worst. The only two teams that they have ranked ahead of them than could be questioned are the Ravens and Jets, who both had worse records last year. But the Jets added some of the best free agents available. Many on this board were saying Faneca was the piece of the puzzle the Broncos should add...well he is a Jet, along with several other legit starters. Also, their draft choices are a bit sexier than ours.

Now, I can't really explain the Ravens being ahead of us, except by reputation. Reed and Lewis are very good and I assume the writer here thinks Brian Billick was a hindrance as coach instead of a help. However, their draft was so-so, they have serious QB issues, and they got nothing in Free Agency. So reputation alone must be driving their ranking.

But seriously, Indy, NE, Dallas, and teams like that deserve to be ranked at the top because they were great last year and don't look to be regressing. The Broncos were lousy last year, and although we might like some of their moves, nationally people arn't seeing us improving much. If this were any other team than the one we love, you'd all be saying the same thing.

We lost our opening day starting #1 reciever from last year, our current #1 might have permanent nerve damage. Our RBs were not spectacular last year and we are going with the same ones. Our starting LT retired and we are replacing him with a rookie. Our D-line was horrendous last year and we are going to start a guy who can't pass a physical. Our new starting MLB is a career backup and is now going to run our defense. Our starting QB has to take insulin shots 4 times a day. Let's face it, until all these question marks are addressed, how can we realistically expect national media to respect a 7-9 team with a difficult schedule?

topscribe
05-13-2008, 10:37 AM
For preseason rankings, it is about what you would expect. The fact is, the Broncos were the 12th worst team in football last year. These rankings have them listed as 10th worst. The only two teams that they have ranked ahead of them than could be questioned are the Ravens and Jets, who both had worse records last year. But the Jets added some of the best free agents available. Many on this board were saying Faneca was the piece of the puzzle the Broncos should add...well he is a Jet, along with several other legit starters. Also, their draft choices are a bit sexier than ours.

Now, I can't really explain the Ravens being ahead of us, except by reputation. Reed and Lewis are very good and I assume the writer here thinks Brian Billick was a hindrance as coach instead of a help. However, their draft was so-so, they have serious QB issues, and they got nothing in Free Agency. So reputation alone must be driving their ranking.

But seriously, Indy, NE, Dallas, and teams like that deserve to be ranked at the top because they were great last year and don't look to be regressing. The Broncos were lousy last year, and although we might like some of their moves, nationally people arn't seeing us improving much. If this were any other team than the one we love, you'd all be saying the same thing.

We lost our opening day starting #1 reciever from last year, our current #1 might have permanent nerve damage. Our RBs were not spectacular last year and we are going with the same ones. Our starting LT retired and we are replacing him with a rookie. Our D-line was horrendous last year and we are going to start a guy who can't pass a physical. Our new starting MLB is a career backup and is now going to run our defense. Our starting QB has to take insulin shots 4 times a day. Let's face it, until all these question marks are addressed, how can we realistically expect national media to respect a 7-9 team with a difficult schedule?

I can't really argue with any of the questions, except the insulin thing. I do
wish people would understand that this is not that big of a deal. History is
rife with athletes who have had Type 1 diabetes and have excelled in their
careers. This will not affect Cutler's career one iota.

This is coming from a person whose family has had several members with
Type 1 diabetes, so I know what I am talking about. Anyone who thinks the
Broncos might not have a QB anymore because of his affliction are talking
from a lack of knowledge and should do some research and ask some
questions first.

-----

pilfin
05-13-2008, 11:38 AM
perhaps so, but when you are talking about national pundits giving national rankings, it can't help that he has an affliction. The whole point is that when you pile up everything that has happened since the end of a 7-9 season, it doesn't look real good on paper. As fans, we tend to think with our hearts and ignore the paper, but national pundits tend to ignore their hearts and go paper (unless there is some type of major hype surrounding a team or player). We have bad paper and we have bad hype. We are actually lucky they didn't rank us further down.

With all that said, as a fan, I think we will surprise some people, which is more fun anyway. Of course, that comes with the caveat that Brandon Marshall makes a full recovery. I remember Darius Watts had a similiar condition that he never recovered from. Now he is on the streets. No Brandon Marshall means our #1 is probably Jackson or Stokely, and we are in deep doo-doo. But I think with Graham protecting our rookie LT, we will be all right. Also, I think the scheme itself will correct some of our woes against the run. I don't think we are super bowl contenders, but there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Just don't expect the pundits to believe when we haven't done anything to indicate they should.

Fan in Exile
05-13-2008, 11:40 AM
perhaps so, but when you are talking about national pundits giving national rankings, it can't help that he has an affliction. The whole point is that when you pile up everything that has happened since the end of a 7-9 season, it doesn't look real good on paper. As fans, we tend to think with our hearts and ignore the paper, but national pundits tend to ignore their hearts and go paper (unless there is some type of major hype surrounding a team or player). We have bad paper and we have bad hype. We are actually lucky they didn't rank us further down.

With all that said, as a fan, I think we will surprise some people, which is more fun anyway. Of course, that comes with the caveat that Brandon Marshall makes a full recovery. I remember Darius Watts had a similiar condition that he never recovered from. Now he is on the streets. No Brandon Marshall means our #1 is probably Jackson or Stokely, and we are in deep doo-doo. But I think with Graham protecting our rookie LT, we will be all right. Also, I think the scheme itself will correct some of our woes against the run. I don't think we are super bowl contenders, but there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Just don't expect the pundits to believe when we haven't done anything to indicate they should.

You didn't pile up everything that's happened though. You just listed the bad stuff and even when you listed the good stuff you put it in it's worst light. I would hope that they would be more balanced than you were.

atwater27
05-13-2008, 11:57 AM
ESPN's rankings are dead on this time.
How many times do they have us rated high, then we do a belly flop and make them look silly. Theey are just gunshy.

pilfin
05-13-2008, 12:39 PM
You didn't pile up everything that's happened though. You just listed the bad stuff and even when you listed the good stuff you put it in it's worst light. I would hope that they would be more balanced than you were.

Look, we were the 12th worst team in the league last year. We are ranked pretty close to that now. What have we done in the offseason that is so compelling that it would make non-fans think we have improved MORE than the teams ahead of us?

Sure, we have added a couple safeties, a LT that looks like he could develop into a good one, a MLB that is unproven but tenacious, and a DT that was once a top 5 draft pick. But what "good stuff" is it that you are talking about that is dynamic. What is it that we did that would make a national pundit sit up and take notice? Replacing our clutch kicker with a guy who had attempted 4 field goals and made one? Perhaps it is our new punter who has only punted 5 times, two of which went out of bounds?

Look, we are rebuilding. There is nothing wrong with that. The entire nation knows it. But a rebuilding team is not expected to compete for a title, and that is going to reflect in the rankings. It is nothing personal, it is just the reality of our situation. That doesn't mean that by next year or the year after, we won't be right in the title chase again.

Acedude
05-13-2008, 02:09 PM
lol. . . . here ya go homes. . .



1 (1) Patriots 16-0-0 A healthy Tom Brady and a happy Randy Moss make the Patriots championship contenders this season and for years to come. (MS)
2 (2) Colts 13-3-0 They haven't had a lot of offseason turnover and they already were very good. Continuity means a lot. (PY)
3 (6) Chargers 11-5-0 If the Chargers can get over their injury issues, they could be in the Super Bowl mix all the way to Tampa. (BW)
4 (3) Cowboys 13-3-0 Felix Jones should help the running game immediately. But who will emerge as the No. 2 receiver? Patrick Crayton wasn't up to the task in late '07. (MM)
5 (4) Jaguars 11-5-0 They sometimes get overshadowed by division rival Indianapolis, but the Jaguars have an elite roster and an elite coach in Jack Del Rio. (PY)
6 (9) Giants 10-6-0 Teams other than the Patriots aren't supposed to repeat as Super Bowl champions. Will Michael Strahan retire? Can they compensate for free-agent losses at LB? (MM)
7 (8) Steelers 10-6-0 A very strong draft catapults the Steelers into Super Bowl contenders. RBs Willie Parker and Rashard Mendenhall should be one of the best 1-2 punches. (JW)
8 (7) Seahawks 10-6-0 New O-line coach Mike Solari stands out as the Seahawks' top offseason acquisition, perhaps allowing them to keep their edge in the NFC West. (MS)
9 (13) Browns 10-6-0 The 2007 darlings face high expectations. The offense will score. Can the D, anchored by additions Shaun Rogers and Corey Williams, hold up its end? (JW)
10 (5) Packers 13-3-0 This is an unpredictable team in the wake of the retirement of Brett Favre. Who will step up and make the big plays this year? (JW)
11 (18) Saints 7-9-0 The offense already was very good. Defensive improvements will make the Saints one of this year's biggest turnarounds. (PY)
12 (15) Vikings 8-8-0 If they settle on a QB, the Vikes could become a playoff team. RB Adrian Peterson is at the top of the list for MVP candidates. (JW)
13 (14) Eagles 8-8-0 Last season, they hit their stride when it was too late. With a fully healed Donovan McNabb and an improved secondary, the Eagles could be dangerous. (MM)
14 (10) Redskins 9-7-0 Too many questions: a new coach, young QB and a pair of rookie WRs. Hard to get a good read. (MM)
15 (12) Buccaneers 9-7-0 They didn't make any splash offseason moves. But RB Warrick Dunn's return is going to help more than many recognize. (PY)
16 (11) Titans 10-6-0 They didn't get as much help from QB Vince Young as they should have. But he's going to become good enough to carry the offense. (PY)
17 (17) Cardinals 8-8-0 Ken Whisenhunt and staff changed the culture in Arizona. Kurt Warner provides top-notch insurance at QB. Depth along the O-line and on defense in general remain the question. (MS)
18 (23) Panthers 7-9-0 The return of QB Jake Delhomme might be enough to get them to the playoffs. But there are no guarantees with Tommy John surgery. (PY)
19 (19) Bills 7-9-0 Marcus Stroud turns 30 this summer and his starts have declined over three seasons. Will he be healthy enough to help the Bills in December? (MS)
20 (16) Texans 8-8-0 They reached respectability in 2007. Improving will be difficult because their division is so tough. (PY)
21 (30) Jets 4-12-0 An offseason spending spree upgraded the roster without answering the Jets' most pressing question: Do they have the right QB? (MS)
22 (25) Ravens 5-11-0 Are the 2008 Ravens more like the 13-3 team in 2006, or the 5-11 unit last season? This is certain: QB play is key. (JW)
23 (21) Broncos 7-9-0 This is the second-best team in the AFC West. That is an indictment of the division, not a pat on the back for this team, which has many holes. (BW)
24 (20) Bears 7-9-0 Seems like ages ago the Bears were NFC champs. For better or worse, fans will have to endure another season of good Rex Grossman and bad Rex Grossman. (JW)
25 (22) Bengals 7-9-0 If WR Chad Johnson sits out, the Bengals will suffer. If Johnson shows, he's a distraction. Neither situation is good. (JW)
26 (27) Raiders 4-12-0 The Raiders' offense won't make people sick anymore, but their defense might. (BW)
27 (26) 49ers 5-11-0 New offensive coordinator Mike Martz provides credibility on offense, but head coach Mike Nolan still must prove he can manage the team more smoothly. (MS)
28 (29) Rams 3-13-0 Quietly, Jim Haslett has turned the defense into a respectable unit. The Rams could contend for a playoff spot if their offensive line can keep Marc Bulger healthy. (MS)
29 (24) Lions 7-9-0 QB Jon Kitna says it will be a disappointment if the Lions don't win 10 games this season. Perhaps he doesn't realize Detroit hasn't won 10 games since 1995. (JW)
30 (28) Chiefs 4-12-0 The Chiefs' rebuilding project has begun, but it's unrealistic to believe they will become contenders anytime soon. (BW)
31 (32) Dolphins 1-15-0 A rookie head coach and an unsettled QB situation add up to growing pains, even though the Dolphins have upgraded their talent base. (MS)
32 (31) Falcons 4-12-0 New coach Mike Smith is the right guy to turn this team around, but it's going to take a few years. (PY)

Denver 12th out of 16 AFC teams? You can't take these Power Rankings seriosly, but nevertheless, if one were to do so a more realistic Ranking would be in the 6-8 range.

Here's the sched:

Sep 8 @Oakland 10:15pm
Sep 14 San Diego 4:15pm
Sep 21 New Orleans 4:05pm
Sep 28 @Kansas City 1:00pm
Oct 5 Tampa Bay 4:05pm
Oct 12 Jacksonville 4:05pm
Oct 20 @New England 8:30pm
Week 8 BYE
Nov 2 Miami 4:05pm
Nov 6 @Cleveland 8:15pm
Nov 16 @Atlanta 1:00pm
Nov 23 Oakland 4:05pm
Nov 30 @N.Y. Jets 1:00pm
Dec 7 Kansas City 4:05pm
Dec 14 @Carolina 1:00pm
Dec 21 Buffalo 4:05pm
Dec 28 @San Diego 4:15pm

We play Buff, Ne, JAX, MIA, Jets, CLE so Denver can put a loss on all those AFC contenders and probably will do so. That evaluation is no more ridiculous than ESPN's.

MOtorboat
05-13-2008, 02:12 PM
Denver 12th out of 16 AFC teams? You can't take these Power Rankings seriosly, but nevertheless, if one were to do so a more realistic Ranking would be in the 6-8 range.

6-8?

In the AFC? or the NFL?

Lonestar
05-13-2008, 02:22 PM
Denver 12th out of 16 AFC teams? You can't take these Power Rankings seriosly, but nevertheless, if one were to do so a more realistic Ranking would be in the 6-8 range.

Here's the sched:

Sep 8 @Oakland 10:15pm
Sep 14 San Diego 4:15pm
Sep 21 New Orleans 4:05pm
Sep 28 @Kansas City 1:00pm
Oct 5 Tampa Bay 4:05pm
Oct 12 Jacksonville 4:05pm
Oct 20 @New England 8:30pm
Week 8 BYE
Nov 2 Miami 4:05pm
Nov 6 @Cleveland 8:15pm
Nov 16 @Atlanta 1:00pm
Nov 23 Oakland 4:05pm
Nov 30 @N.Y. Jets 1:00pm
Dec 7 Kansas City 4:05pm
Dec 14 @Carolina 1:00pm
Dec 21 Buffalo 4:05pm
Dec 28 @San Diego 4:15pm

We play Buff, Ne, JAX, MIA, Jets, CLE so Denver can put a loss on all those AFC contenders and probably will do so. That evaluation is no more ridiculous than ESPN's.



7-9 was last years numbers not this years projections..

Acedude
05-13-2008, 02:50 PM
6-8?

In the AFC? or the NFL?

AFC. I don't give a fig for League rankings, what counts is AFC. That's the competition. And like I posted, Denver gets to play 6 AFC teams outside of the AFC West this year. So between the AFC West and those 6 games, Denver plays 12 of 16 games against AFC oponnents. Talk about controlling your own future.

MOtorboat
05-13-2008, 03:01 PM
AFC. I don't give a fig for League rankings, what counts is AFC. That's the competition. And like I posted, Denver gets to play 6 AFC teams outside of the AFC West this year. So between the AFC West and those 6 games, Denver plays 12 of 16 games against AFC oponnents. Talk about controlling your own future.

They get to play 6 games in the AFC outside of the West every year. They play 12 of 16 against AFC opponents every year. And, the same goes for the other teams in the conference as well...so every team controls its own future, that's nothing new at all.

But, we're certainly not Top 6. I can argue Top 6-8, but I think realistically, Denver is probably looking at Top 7-9 right now heading into the season. Of course, I would have said the same thing about the Giants last year.

Lonestar
05-13-2008, 03:03 PM
AFC. I don't give a fig for League rankings, what counts is AFC. That's the competition. And like I posted, Denver gets to play 6 AFC teams outside of the AFC West this year. So between the AFC West and those 6 games, Denver plays 12 of 16 games against AFC oponnents. Talk about controlling your own future.

could mean 12 loses.. although a split with OAK and KC probably narrow it down to 9-10

Acedude
05-13-2008, 03:26 PM
They get to play 6 games in the AFC outside of the West every year. They play 12 of 16 against AFC opponents every year. And, the same goes for the other teams in the conference as well...so every team controls its own future, that's nothing new at all.

But, we're certainly not Top 6. I can argue Top 6-8, but I think realistically, Denver is probably looking at Top 7-9 right now heading into the season. Of course, I would have said the same thing about the Giants last year.

What do you think I'm doing? Denver gets to play the AFC teams "ranked" above them on this ESPN article cle, buff, jets, jax, ne. I'm saying my evaluation that Denver could put losses on them and therefore should be rated ahead of some of them is just as valid as ESPN's "ranking". Jesus. I must have not made a clear point, I thought I did.

MOtorboat
05-13-2008, 03:28 PM
What do you think I'm doing? Denver gets to play the AFC teams "ranked" above them on this ESPN article cle, buff, jets, jax, ne. I'm saying my evaluation that Denver could put losses on them and therefore should be rated ahead of some of them is just as valid as ESPN's "ranking". Jesus. I must have not made a clear point, I thought I did.

You're right, I didn't quite catch your draft, but I don't think we can rank them higher just because we play those teams, because after all...don't they play us too?

BCJ
05-13-2008, 03:41 PM
Easily a top ten team.

If I want to toss the homer hat on, it's top 5.

Realistically, it's easily a top 10 team.


Labeling us top 10, you already are a homer with the hat on. If you say we are Top 5, then you just added bells and whistles to that hat. We havent had June mini camp so no way of knowing what we got since the free agency/draft signings. We are 23rd because our defense sucked eggs last year and we werent above .500. We get what we deserve in this power rankings. Plus, does this mean we lose the super bowl and not make the playoffs on paper? I would rather see what we do on the field and let the power rankings follow that. In the meantime, WHO CARES!

Acedude
05-13-2008, 03:48 PM
could mean 12 loses.. although a split with OAK and KC probably narrow it down to 9-10

Ahh, you're too negative right now. :cool: Dewayne Robertson played in the AFC East we play all four of those teams this year, maybe he gives some insight to his teammates how to play against those opponents.

MOtorboat
05-13-2008, 04:17 PM
Ahh, you're too negative right now. :cool: Dewayne Robertson played in the AFC East we play all four of those teams this year, maybe he gives some insight to his teammates how to play against those opponents.

Um, yeah...I'm never going to buy into that argument...

Medford Bronco
05-13-2008, 04:20 PM
Labeling us top 10, you already are a homer with the hat on. If you say we are Top 5, then you just added bells and whistles to that hat. We havent had June mini camp so no way of knowing what we got since the free agency/draft signings. We are 23rd because our defense sucked eggs last year and we werent above .500. We get what we deserve in this power rankings. Plus, does this mean we lose the super bowl and not make the playoffs on paper? I would rather see what we do on the field and let the power rankings follow that. In the meantime, WHO CARES!

one of the smartest and bests posts in this thread :beer:

we are not a top 10 team right now, but right now is May 13th and this power ranking thing means nothing right now. last time i checked there was no game for 4 more months.

top 5 is :rofl:

top 10 is :pound:

top 15 (between 12-16 is more realistic from what we have RIGHT NOW, but like i said right no dont mean jack)

Acedude
05-13-2008, 04:36 PM
You're right, I didn't quite catch your draft, but I don't think we can rank them higher just because we play those teams, because after all...don't they play us too?

I look at the AFC opponents outside of the AFC West and they aren't much better than Denver on paper. I look at NE and Denver isn't scared of them at all. For whatever reason, Denver is very confident they can beat NE 9 times out of 10, and confidence is half the battle. The Jets can't beat Denver. Buffalo can't beat Denver. Jax is a middle of the road team, Garrard will fall apart under pressure. Del Rio put together a superb coaching year last year, the odds of that happening again are not good. Cleveland can fall apart any time, I'm confident of that.

I am maybe wrong about all that, but once again my evaluation is no less valid than ESPN's at this point.

MOtorboat
05-13-2008, 04:42 PM
I look at the AFC opponents outside of the AFC West and they aren't much better than Denver on paper. I look at NE and Denver isn't scared of them at all. For whatever reason, Denver is very confident they can beat NE 9 times out of 10, and confidence is half the battle. The Jets can't beat Denver. Buffalo can't beat Denver. Jax is a middle of the road team, Garrard will fall apart under pressure. Del Rio put together a superb coaching year last year, the odds of that happening again are not good. Cleveland can fall apart any time, I'm confident of that.

I am maybe wrong about all that, but once again my evaluation is no less valid than ESPN's at this point.

You are a very confident fan. I have no real reason why Jacksonville wouldn't dominate us again and I see no way that Denver beats New England right now. Those past 9 out of 10 times are nice, but we're two years removed from the last one. The others, I'll give a toss up to, but on paper, they look like they probably improved more than Denver.

Acedude
05-13-2008, 04:45 PM
Um, yeah...I'm never going to buy into that argument...

Yeah, it's a reach of an argument, but what the heck, it's the month of May. :D

Acedude
05-13-2008, 05:19 PM
You are a very confident fan. I have no real reason why Jacksonville wouldn't dominate us again and I see no way that Denver beats New England right now. Those past 9 out of 10 times are nice, but we're two years removed from the last one. The others, I'll give a toss up to, but on paper, they look like they probably improved more than Denver.

I'm projecting some. It's May, what the hell? There is no telling at all right now how this season will end up. I'll go out on a limb same as ESPN and everybody else is doing right now and say that I think Indy is getting weaker. I think NE is getting weaker. Randy Moss mailed it in during the SB, he didn't compete worth a damn. Teammates recognize that and he won't be the **** of the walk again this year in NE. NE's defense is over the hill, they've lost their mojo. NE won't win the SB this year, neither will Indy. Seattle may be the SB winner. AFC Title champs may be the Broncos. It's a big toss-up for the AFC Title. I'd give it to SD right now.

It's May, what the heck. It's all guess work right now.

Lonestar
05-13-2008, 05:23 PM
I look at the AFC opponents outside of the AFC West and they aren't much better than Denver on paper. I look at NE and Denver isn't scared of them at all. For whatever reason, Denver is very confident they can beat NE 9 times out of 10, and confidence is half the battle. The Jets can't beat Denver. Buffalo can't beat Denver. Jax is a middle of the road team, Garrard will fall apart under pressure. Del Rio put together a superb coaching year last year, the odds of that happening again are not good. Cleveland can fall apart any time, I'm confident of that.

I am maybe wrong about all that, but once again my evaluation is no less valid than ESPN's at this point.

It does not matter if we can beat NYJ, BUF, CLE or NE . Those old stats go out the window this is a brand new team except for 6-8 players. For the most part we are not playing them week after week they beat each other up in their division.. Last year we lost 3-4 games at HOME..


we have road games with
OAK, KC, NE, CLE, ATL, NYJ, CAR, SAN None of which will be easy ones..
could easily be 1-7 with this group or with alot of luck 4-4
home games early
SAN, NOL, TPA, JAX, then finally and easier game MIA, OAK, KC, BUF,
could be as good as 5-3 or bad as 2-6.

spikerman
05-13-2008, 05:45 PM
I have to admit that, as much as it pains me, I can't argue with the ESPN ranking. Why they're putting out a "power poll" at this time of year baffles me, but it is what it is. Since they are putting out this poll they have nothing to go on but last year, and the hype from this offseason's draft and free agency. At first glance, IMHO, Denver didn't do enough to address their main problems and actually inherited another major one. I'm sure I'll just regurgitate what's been said on here, but here's why I don't think the Broncos deserve to be ranked higher at this point:

1. The d-line was putrid last year and the only thing they did was to trade for a player who, while a nice addition, may be playing on borrowed time with that bum knee and they didn't see fit to address the position in the draft until the 5th round.
2. The addition of Keary Colbert makes no sense to me. They said they brought him in to be a slot receiver, but unless something happens to Stokely - Denver overpaid and could have used that money elsewhere.
3. Linebackers - I'm curious to see what Niko can do, but he is an unproven commodity as a starting MLB. While Boss Bailey may be a decent player he has done nothing to distinguish himself in the NFL. In fact, with all of the run defense problems last year, the entire LB core will be new or at a different position.
4. Marshall - He was the one consistent offensive threat last year (excluding Cutler) and who knows if he'll be the same?
5. Slowik - This is his 4th time (I think) as a defensive coordinator and the other three didn't work out well. Unless he's really grown in the job, I'm not optimistic.

Obviously, we don't know how the team and the season will ultimately play out, but at this point the rating seems fair to me. Of course, I'm a pessimist by nature. :D

Tned
05-13-2008, 06:21 PM
Look, we were the 12th worst team in the league last year. We are ranked pretty close to that now. What have we done in the offseason that is so compelling that it would make non-fans think we have improved MORE than the teams ahead of us?


Which is why nobody can really argue with the power ranking. I personally think we will be better than that, but I can't argue with the power ranking based on how we finished the year and the moves we have made.

Acedude
05-13-2008, 06:34 PM
It does not matter if we can beat NYJ, BUF, CLE or NE . Those old stats go out the window this is a brand new team except for 6-8 players. For the most part we are not playing them week after week they beat each other up in their division.. Last year we lost 3-4 games at HOME..


we have road games with
OAK, KC, NE, CLE, ATL, NYJ, CAR, SAN None of which will be easy ones..
could easily be 1-7 with this group or with alot of luck 4-4
home games early
SAN, NOL, TPA, JAX, then finally and easier game MIA, OAK, KC, BUF,
could be as good as 5-3 or bad as 2-6.

I think potentially it will matter if we can beat the jets, ne, cle, buff, jax. Yes, it also matters if we can't beat enough of the other teams we play.

broncosfanscott
05-13-2008, 07:17 PM
I honestly don't care about the power rankings because they don't mean a thing and they won't help you win football games. Meaningless and a waste of time.

TXBRONC
05-13-2008, 09:53 PM
I honestly don't care about the power rankings because they don't mean a thing and they won't help you win football games. Meaningless and a waste of time.

This sounds very familiar to me. :salute:

MOtorboat
05-13-2008, 10:40 PM
I find it kind of funny the people who come in here and say that they don't care...then why even post?

By posting, you clearly do care...if you didn't, you'd move on.

broncosfanscott
05-13-2008, 11:38 PM
I am just stating my opinion. Nothing wrong with that.

topscribe
05-13-2008, 11:42 PM
I find it kind of funny the people who come in here and say that they don't care...then why even post?

By posting, you clearly do care...if you didn't, you'd move on.

It's the dreaded offseason . . . what else is there to talk about (outside the Lounge)? :noidea:

-----

dogfish
05-14-2008, 12:44 AM
I find it kind of funny the people who come in here and say that they don't care...then why even post?

By posting, you clearly do care...if you didn't, you'd move on.


wanna fight, midget?


:boxing:

TXBRONC
05-14-2008, 05:49 AM
wanna fight, midget?


:boxing:


Isn't there a law against beating up on midgets? :D

Fan in Exile
05-14-2008, 12:05 PM
Look, we were the 12th worst team in the league last year. We are ranked pretty close to that now. What have we done in the offseason that is so compelling that it would make non-fans think we have improved MORE than the teams ahead of us?

Sure, we have added a couple safeties, a LT that looks like he could develop into a good one, a MLB that is unproven but tenacious, and a DT that was once a top 5 draft pick. But what "good stuff" is it that you are talking about that is dynamic. What is it that we did that would make a national pundit sit up and take notice? Replacing our clutch kicker with a guy who had attempted 4 field goals and made one? Perhaps it is our new punter who has only punted 5 times, two of which went out of bounds?

Look, we are rebuilding. There is nothing wrong with that. The entire nation knows it. But a rebuilding team is not expected to compete for a title, and that is going to reflect in the rankings. It is nothing personal, it is just the reality of our situation. That doesn't mean that by next year or the year after, we won't be right in the title chase again.

None of those points actually apply to what I said. You didn't list any of the good stuff. That's the plain and simple truth. I didn't argue that we should be listed higher I didn't say we should get more respect I just pointed out your bias.

It's nothing personal for me either, you just didn't list all the facts. I do have to wonder though why you had such problems with such a simple statement.

MOtorboat
05-14-2008, 12:51 PM
None of those points actually apply to what I said. You didn't list any of the good stuff. That's the plain and simple truth. I didn't argue that we should be listed higher I didn't say we should get more respect I just pointed out your bias.

It's nothing personal for me either, you just didn't list all the facts. I do have to wonder though why you had such problems with such a simple statement.

Please point out the good points...

Fan in Exile
05-14-2008, 04:24 PM
Please point out the good points...

Are you serious? Do you really need someone to tell you the good points?

MOtorboat
05-14-2008, 06:04 PM
Are you serious? Do you really need someone to tell you the good points?

Yeah, I guess I do, because I see a DT that couldn't pass a physical, two backup safeties, a LB who couldn't get on the field in Seattle and a rookie left tackle replacing a hall of famer (imo)...wanna tell me where I'm wrong?

Inkana7
05-14-2008, 06:10 PM
Yeah, I guess I do, because I see a DT that couldn't pass a physical, two backup safeties, a LB who couldn't get on the field in Seattle and a rookie left tackle replacing a hall of famer (imo)...wanna tell me where I'm wrong?

Really? Because I see a DT that's played and started just about every game the past three years, one backup safety and one starting safety, a LB who backed up the best in the league and got high, high praise from his position coach, and a rookie left tackle replacing a guy who really shouldn't have been on the field last season. Oh, and who isn't a hall of famer.

MOtorboat
05-14-2008, 06:20 PM
Really? Because I see a DT that's played and started just about every game the past three years, one backup safety and one starting safety, a LB who backed up the best in the league and got high, high praise from his position coach, and a rookie left tackle replacing a guy who really shouldn't have been on the field last season. Oh, and who isn't a hall of famer.

Huh? Got me there, because I have no clue what you're talking about.

Four years. Two starts. He preceded Tatupu, btw.

Robertson didn't pass a physical. I hope he starts, I hope he dominates, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

Yes, McCree started last year, but why has he been with with five teams in eight years...stop gap?

And I love the Clady pick...I'm a Clady guy...but I don't think he'll have the impact that Joe Thomas had last year with the Browns. I think it might take a few years.

Therefore, there's really no reason Denver should be considered a top 10 team right now.

Sorry, but that's the truth.

Fan in Exile
05-14-2008, 09:09 PM
Huh? Got me there, because I have no clue what you're talking about.

Four years. Two starts. He preceded Tatupu, btw.

Robertson didn't pass a physical. I hope he starts, I hope he dominates, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

Yes, McCree started last year, but why has he been with with five teams in eight years...stop gap?

And I love the Clady pick...I'm a Clady guy...but I don't think he'll have the impact that Joe Thomas had last year with the Browns. I think it might take a few years.

Therefore, there's really no reason Denver should be considered a top 10 team right now.

Sorry, but that's the truth.

Just because Denver hasn't become a top ten team yet doesn't mean they didn't do good things this off-season. They brought in some role players they brought in a couple of players who will start and be better than the guys who played last year. People like Joe Thomas are few and far between, just because someone isn't at that level doesn't mean that they aren't good.

You may want to check and see what reasonable expectations are for a team in the off-season. We did what you could reasonably expect a team to do.

SmilinAssasSin27
05-14-2008, 09:43 PM
and a rookie left tackle replacing a hall of famer (imo)...wanna tell me where I'm wrong?

I do. I do.

Lepsis a hall of famer? C'mon Mizzou. Yer better than that.

TXBRONC
05-14-2008, 09:46 PM
I do. I do.

Lepsis a hall of famer? C'mon Mizzou. Yer better than that.

Lepsis was very good but I agree he wasn't at same level as Gary Zimmerman.

MOtorboat
05-14-2008, 09:56 PM
I do. I do.

Lepsis a hall of famer? C'mon Mizzou. Yer better than that.

Hell ****EDIT**** yeah!

topscribe
05-14-2008, 09:57 PM
Yeah, I guess I do, because I see a DT that couldn't pass a physical, two backup safeties, a LB who couldn't get on the field in Seattle and a rookie left tackle replacing a hall of famer (imo)...wanna tell me where I'm wrong?

You're wrong in referring to Lepsis as a HOFer. He was damn good for us, but
he was NOT a HOFer. He wasn't even the second best offensive lineman
we've ever had.

Clady will probably struggle at times at his spot . . . that's a common malady
with rookies. But by his third year, I expect him to be better than Lepsis ever
was.

Regarding Niko, he couldn't beat out the all-universe MLB in front of him, just
like TD couldn't beat out the all-univers RB in front of him when he was in
college. But Niko's LB coach in Seattle said he's a damn good linebacker,
something he did not have to say. So I'm not going to draw a conclusion
until I see him out there on the field.

The safeties got by last year, and this year is an upgrade for them . . . yes,
they don't have an Ed Reed back there, but they are good enough. It's the
DL that needed improvement, and Robertson may not be able to pass a
physical, but he would not have even three years ago, and how many
games has he missed? Moreover, Thomas has a year under his belt, and he
is in far better shape already than he was last year. And Powell is a guy
who allowed NO positive yardage against the run . . . how many DTs can
say that?

There. You have some good points now.

-----

MOtorboat
05-14-2008, 09:59 PM
Just because Denver hasn't become a top ten team yet doesn't mean they didn't do good things this off-season. They brought in some role players they brought in a couple of players who will start and be better than the guys who played last year. People like Joe Thomas are few and far between, just because someone isn't at that level doesn't mean that they aren't good.

You may want to check and see what reasonable expectations are for a team in the off-season. We did what you could reasonably expect a team to do.

The whole point of the thread is where you would rank the teams right now...I have done a very thorough evaluation of my own as to where we are, and we are no where near the Top 10. My reasonable expectations are middle of the pack right now.

Yes, Joe Thomas is far between...my point being that we didn't pick up Joe Thomas, we picked up Ryan Clady, and he's not going to have the impact that Thomas had last year, thus not transforming our offense into a top offense in this league, at least next year.

Again, this thread is about the ESPN Power Rankings, and we're about where we should be.

MOtorboat
05-14-2008, 10:09 PM
You're wrong in referring to Lepsis as a HOFer. He was damn good for us, but
he was NOT a HOFer. He wasn't even the second best offensive lineman
we've ever had.

Clady will probably struggle at times at his spot . . . that's a common malady
with rookies. But by his third year, I expect him to be better than Lepsis ever
was.

Regarding Niko, he couldn't beat out the all-universe MLB in front of him, just
like TD couldn't beat out the all-univers RB in front of him when he was in
college. But Niko's LB coach in Seattle said he's a damn good linebacker,
something he did not have to say. So I'm not going to draw a conclusion
until I see him out there on the field.

The safeties got by last year, and this year is an upgrade for them . . . yes,
they don't have an Ed Reed back there, but they are good enough. It's the
DL that needed improvement, and Robertson may not be able to pass a
physical, but he would not have even three years ago, and how many
games has he missed? Moreover, Thomas has a year under his belt, and he
is in far better shape already than he was last year. And Powell is a guy
who allowed NO positive yardage against the run . . . how many DTs can
say that?

There. You have some good points now.

-----

Lepsis started 133 games for the most dominating rushing game during his tenure as tackle. That's dominating. I believe he deserves a spot. He won't get it, but he should be considered.

TXBRONC
05-14-2008, 10:16 PM
Lepsis started 133 games for the most dominating rushing game during his tenure as tackle. That's dominating. I believe he deserves a spot. He won't get it, but he should be considered.

He was good in his prime and was very good run blocker but I still don't think he as at the same level as say Gary Zimmerman or for that matter Tony Jones.

Timmy!
05-14-2008, 10:18 PM
Denver is ranked lower than they should be IMO. I'd have us at 15-18, right in the middle. I believe this team has the capability to be top 10 by seasons end though. We will see.

SmilinAssasSin27
05-14-2008, 10:20 PM
I honestly have ZERO feel as to where the Broncos rank as a team. Last year, many thought we were a legit pass rush away from a strong playoff run...err...that wasn't the case. Our D was awesome in 2006 til it tired out. BUT the 2 DTs from that year are gonzo now. Have they been replaced? I hope so.

Our Safeties SUCK. Point blank. Abdullah is still a project. Lynch is elderly and the 2 FAs are simply depth which allowed us more freedom in the draft. I hope to god the rookie plays to his measureables. He plays anywhere near his skillset and he starts by week 5.

Our LBs are improved. Not huge on Boss, but he is an upgrade over Ian Gold and he says he wasn't used right in Detroit. I REALLY think Niko is gonna shock us all. Outside of Denver fans, who can name our starting MLBs in 97 and 98? Niko is a hard nosed, hard working team player surrounded by uberathletic OLBs and hopefully stouter DTs. LBs will be awesome, I feel.

CBs...we're in great shape there.

QB, RB, TE, interior OLine seem to be locked and loaded. Remember, we had quite a few OLine injuries last year. WR position can be GREAT, but can also flop. Same w/ OT. Clady is getting the nod at LT. It's between Harris, Kuper and Pears on the Right side.

Special teams have much more depth now based on our draft and FA signings, HOWEVER scheme played a part in previous failures and Elam went bye bye.

So....our D was badass in 2006 and we missed the playoffs. Our O was the stabilizing force in 2007...and we missed the playoffs. In 2006, we just needed a DE. After the 07 season, we needed to fix 5-7 spots. We added players, character and improved the overall depth. Is it enough?

If I had to guess, we are a middle of the pack team. In the AFC we should be better than Miami, NYJ, Cincy, KC and Oakland. We aren't as good as NE, Pitt, Clev, Indy, Jax or SD. IMHO, we are on par with Buffalo, Houston, Tenn and Bmore.

In the NFC, we're better than Carolina, St. Louis, Atlanta, Detroit, Chicago, San Fran and Zona. We aren't as good as NYG, Dallas, GB or Seattle. We are on par with Philly, Wash, Minn, NO and TB.

based on that, we are clearly better than 12 teams, but clearly worse than 10 teams. I guess we should be ranked between 11 and 20.

MOtorboat
05-14-2008, 10:25 PM
I honestly have ZERO feel as to where the Broncos rank as a team. Last year, many thought we were a legit pass rush away from a strong playoff run...err...that wasn't the case. Our D was awesome in 2006 til it tired out. BUT the 2 DTs from that year are gonzo now. Have they been replaced? I hope so.

Our Safeties SUCK. Point blank. Abdullah is still a project. Lynch is elderly and the 2 FAs are simply depth which allowed us more freedom in the draft. I hope to god the rookie plays to his measureables. He plays anywhere near his skillset and he starts by week 5.

Our LBs are improved. Not huge on Boss, but he is an upgrade over Ian Gold and he says he wasn't used right in Detroit. I REALLY think Niko is gonna shock us all. Outside of Denver fans, who can name our starting MLBs in 97 and 98? Niko is a hard nosed, hard working team player surrounded by uberathletic OLBs and hopefully stouter DTs. LBs will be awesome, I feel.

CBs...we're in great shape there.

QB, RB, TE, interior OLine seem to be locked and loaded. Remember, we had quite a few OLine injuries last year. WR position can be GREAT, but can also flop. Same w/ OT. Clady is getting the nod at LT. It's between Harris, Kuper and Pears on the Right side.

Special teams have much more depth now based on our draft and FA signings, HOWEVER scheme played a part in previous failures and Elam went bye bye.

So....our D was badass in 2006 and we missed the playoffs. Our O was the stabilizing force in 2007...and we missed the playoffs. In 2006, we just needed a DE. After the 07 season, we needed to fix 5-7 spots. We added players, character and improved the overall depth. Is it enough?

If I had to guess, we are a middle of the pack team. In the AFC we should be better than Miami, NYJ, Cincy, KC and Oakland. We aren't as good as NE, Pitt, Clev, Indy, Jax or SD. IMHO, we are on par with Buffalo, Houston, Tenn and Bmore.

In the NFC, we're better than Carolina, St. Louis, Atlanta, Detroit, Chicago, San Fran and Zona. We aren't as good as NYG, Dallas, GB or Seattle. We are on par with Philly, Wash, Minn, NO and TB.

based on that, we are clearly better than 12 teams, but clearly worse than 10 teams. I guess we should be ranked between 11 and 20.

You still aren't comparing them to anyone. You have to objectively compare us to other teams.

SmilinAssasSin27
05-14-2008, 10:26 PM
You still aren't comparing them to anyone. You have to objectively compare us to other teams.

did you read the last 3 paragraphs? I compared them to EVERY team.

dogfish
05-14-2008, 10:47 PM
did you read the last 3 paragraphs? I compared them to EVERY team.

seriously, WTH MO? you're off tonight. . . run outta bood light or somethin'. . . ?


:confused:



he couldn't have compared them to other teams more clearly or directly. . .



:huh:

champbronc2
05-15-2008, 08:57 PM
Easily a top ten team.

If I want to toss the homer hat on, it's top 5.

Realistically, it's easily a top 10 team.

I agree. Well actually more of a top 15.

But our ranking was just ridiculous.

MOtorboat
05-15-2008, 09:25 PM
I agree. Well actually more of a top 15.

But our ranking was just ridiculous.

Right...:rolleyes:

champbronc2
05-16-2008, 07:56 PM
Right...:rolleyes:

I have high expectations for this team.

Anything less than playoffs is simply unacceptable to me.

Lonestar
05-16-2008, 07:58 PM
I have high expectations for this team.

Anything less than playoffs is simply unacceptable to me.


you can get Valium on line now.. Better load up for this season..

Watchthemiddle
05-16-2008, 08:04 PM
Between 17-20 sounds about right.

Not elite, not top 10, but not bottom of the barrel either.

One big improvement for this team this season is to win more at home. Bring back the winning tradition at Mile High, and to beat the teams we should beat.

Do those two things, and we could be a 10-6, or 11-5 team.

TXBRONC
05-16-2008, 08:20 PM
Between 17-20 sounds about right.

Not elite, not top 10, but not bottom of the barrel either.

One big improvement for this team this season is to win more at home. Bring back the winning tradition at Mile High, and to beat the teams we should beat.

Do those two things, and we could be a 10-6, or 11-5 team.

If the team can gel within the first quarter of the season then 10-6 is possible.

Watchthemiddle
05-16-2008, 08:23 PM
If the team can gel within the first quarter of the season then 10-6 is possible.

6-2 at home ans split the road games.

7-1 would be great, 8-8 would be outstanding...that would take us to 11-5 or 12-4.

TXBRONC
05-17-2008, 06:01 PM
6-2 at home ans split the road games.

7-1 would be great, 8-8 would be outstanding...that would take us to 11-5 or 12-4.

I know this clique but really doesn't matter where we start in this poll it matter where we finish.

MOtorboat
05-17-2008, 06:23 PM
I have high expectations for this team.

Anything less than playoffs is simply unacceptable to me.

There is a complete difference between thinking your team is Top 15 and expecting a playoff team every year.

In fact...the two have nothing to do with each other at all.

TXBRONC
05-17-2008, 07:02 PM
There is a complete difference between thinking your team is Top 15 and expecting a playoff team every year.

In fact...the two have nothing to do with each other at all.

They do to a small degree. It gives you idea of who they see as playoff caliber teams.

MOtorboat
05-17-2008, 07:33 PM
They do to a small degree. It gives you idea of who they see as playoff caliber teams.

But it has nothing to do with your expectations, for your team.

Every team should expect playoffs every year...yet only 12 teams make it to the playoffs every year...that's the point.

His statement was saying he expects us to be in the playoffs every year, therefore, we must now be a Top 12 team. The declarations there cannot be dependent upon each other...

TXBRONC
05-17-2008, 07:47 PM
But it has nothing to do with your expectations, for your team.

Every team should expect playoffs every year...yet only 12 teams make it to the playoffs every year...that's the point.

His statement was saying he expects us to be in the playoffs every year, therefore, we must now be a Top 12 team. The declarations there cannot be dependent upon each other...

MB I know what champbronc2 statement was because I read it.

At anyrate, the power ranks do give us an idea of who they (those who rank the teams) think are playoff caliber teams.

omac
05-17-2008, 09:14 PM
But it has nothing to do with your expectations, for your team.

Every team should expect playoffs every year...yet only 12 teams make it to the playoffs every year...that's the point.

His statement was saying he expects us to be in the playoffs every year, therefore, we must now be a Top 12 team. The declarations there cannot be dependent upon each other...

That statement is a bit flawed; the 12 teams that make the playoffs are not necessarily the 12 best teams in the league. Strength of schedule and the toughness of the division a team is in will influence just how many wins a team will get, and their standing within the division plays a major role.

MOtorboat
05-17-2008, 09:15 PM
That statement is a bit flawed; the 12 teams that make the playoffs are not necessarily the 12 best teams in the league. Strength of schedule and the toughness of the division a team is in will influence just how many wins a team will get, and their standing within the division plays a major role.

You're right, it is flawed....but by no means does our "ranking" mean we are a playoff team.

omac
05-17-2008, 09:21 PM
You're right, it is flawed....but by no means does our "ranking" mean we are a playoff team.

You mean the power rankings? It's fun to read, but I don't put too much weight on their speculations, although I do agree where they put Denver. Teams like NO and Cleveland had a great season after having a very mediocre one, and very few would've picked the Giants to reach, let alone win the Superbowl, so truth is, anything can happen. :cheers:

TXBRONC
05-17-2008, 09:58 PM
You mean the power rankings? It's fun to read, but I don't put too much weight on their speculations, although I do agree where they put Denver. Teams like NO and Cleveland had a great season after having a very mediocre one, and very few would've picked the Giants to reach, let alone win the Superbowl, so truth is, anything can happen. :cheers:

That's the way I feel about it. The rankings are interesting to look at but I don't put much stock in them.

Tned
05-17-2008, 11:03 PM
You mean the power rankings? It's fun to read,

A lot more fun to wait for every Tuesday morning when the Broncos are near the top, rather than the bottom of the rankings.

Superchop 7
05-18-2008, 02:21 AM
If it is to be,

It's up to me.

topscribe
05-18-2008, 02:42 AM
You mean the power rankings? It's fun to read, but I don't put too much weight on their speculations, although I do agree where they put Denver. Teams like NO and Cleveland had a great season after having a very mediocre one, and very few would've picked the Giants to reach, let alone win the Superbowl, so truth is, anything can happen. :cheers:

And I don't remember seeing the New York Giants in the Top 5 last year . . .

-----

champbronc2
05-18-2008, 08:38 AM
Well I think 10-6 (my prediction) is good enough to be top 15.

MOtorboat
05-18-2008, 09:10 AM
Well I think 10-6 (my prediction) is good enough to be top 15.

Your prediction...

From a national columnist's view, I don't think there's any reason to think Denver is that good...