PDA

View Full Version : No respect. . .we get no respect



Dean
06-09-2010, 12:00 PM
We are ranked twenty-fourth? Another unbeliever. I'm not sure why I am surprised anymore.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d818768f4&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true




Rankings: Things seem to line up for the Chargers in 2010
By Steve Wyche | NFL.com
Senior Writer


With rookies entrenched in offseason workouts and the majority of free-agent movement and trades finalized, it's time to recalibrate how teams stack up one through 32 -- in June.

No team has ever made a Super Bowl in its home stadium, and I'm not saying Dallas will, but the Cowboys have the roster to make them the team to beat heading into 2010. However, their schedule is rugged, and they might not get through their docket medically upright or in playoff contention. The Jets look incredible on paper, but it's tough to get too infatuated knowing that a quarterback's second season is often his most difficult, so Mark Sanchez will have to overcome that. Plus, the new players might not be as good as the ones they replaced.

The more I examined teams, their schedules and the like, there's a team in Southern California that is teed up for a big season, and one in crab country not far behind.

Fan rankings
We asked for your rankings, and you have spoken with more than 100,000 ballots cast. Where did your favorite team land? More ...

» Pat Kirwan's rankings 1. Chargers -- The Bolts run game improves with rookie Ryan Mathews, and they play just two playoff teams in the first 10 games.

2. Ravens -- WR Anquan Boldin plus RB Ray Rice plus QB Joe Flacco makes this offense as fearsome as the defense.

3. Cowboys -- This team boasts enviable depth. If it can survive its early schedule -- including a highly anticipated rematch with Minnesota in Week 6 -- watch out.

4. Colts -- The beefed up offensive line should help, and the returns of WR Anthony Gonzalez and S Bob Sanders add more firepower on both sides.

5. Packers -- A second season playing the 3-4 defense and a better offensive line with the addition of rookie tackle Bryan Bulaga make this the team to beat in the NFC North.

6. Bengals -- The defense might be the most physical in the AFC. Carson Palmer needs to regain his form. He has more wide receiver (Antonio Bryant) and tight end (Jermaine Gresham) threats.

7. Falcons -- CB Dunta Robinson and rookie LB Sean Weatherspoon change the tenor of the defense. RB Michael Turner is already in shape to return to form.

8. Saints -- Like Indy's Peyton Manning, N'awlins' Drew Brees will have the Saints in the thick of things. The O-line is really good and DE Alex Brown should improve the defensive front.

9. Vikings -- Even if Brett Favre is back, there's no telling if he'll be as money as last season. Minny has to be better in all areas, especially in the secondary.

10. Jets -- Something about all their high-profile moves seems like there's a trap door ready to sink the ship, but Rex Ryan can coach with the best of them, giving N.Y. an edge in the AFC East.


Unlock HQ Video HQ video delivered by Akamai
11. Patriots -- The Pats could start slow, but by the end of the season when Wes Welker is back and some of the young players have their footing, New England could be fearsome.

12. Texans -- Losing LB Brian Cushing for four games hurts. Adding CB Kareem Jackson and RB Ben Tate helps. Matt Schaub needs to take the next step, and Houston needs to win in the division.

13. 49ers -- QB Alex Smith doesn't have to do anything great. He just can't make mistakes. If he keeps improving, San Francisco should win the NFC West.

14. Titans -- The youth movement should benefit the Titans. Some common ground needs to be found with RB Chris Johnson, otherwise his contract demands could be a distraction.

15. Giants -- Defensively New York should be better, but there aren't any assurances of that. The running game and the offensive line play could determine if this is a playoff team.

16. Dolphins -- Defensive coordinator Mike Nolan will have the defense better and unpredictable. WR Brandon Marshall will change the dynamic of the offense. QB Chad Henne is the key.

17. Eagles -- The switch to QB Kevin Kolb and the overall youth push could help chemistry but cause the team to take a step back. Not a radical one. Philly should get better as the season progresses.

18. Cardinals -- The offensive identity will turn more to the ground game to ease the pressure off Matt Leinart. Ken Whisenhunt is an excellent coach, but this transition could stall things.

19. Steelers -- S Troy Polamalu's return will re-ignite the defense, but the Big Ben/QB situation could disrupt the offense -- and team chemistry. They may miss the playoffs for the second straight year.


Unlock HQ Video HQ video delivered by Akamai
20. Seahawks -- Coach Pete Carroll has re-energized the troops and QB Matt Hasselbeck is really dialed in, but there are still a lot of holes that need to be plugged.

21. Raiders -- Oakland could emerge as a playoff team, but that's if QB Jason Campbell shows that he's that type of quarterback. He's an upgrade from JaMarcus Russell, but he's still a question mark.

22. Buccaneers -- Tampa Bay could be this season's sleeper team -- if the rookies all step up. That's asking a lot. They should be a lot better, especially on offense, but not quite yet.

23. Jaguars -- Another possible sleeper. The young O-line should be better as should the offense as a whole, but the defense still is unsettled. Not good in a division where offense is king.

24. Broncos -- Forget the Tim Tebow hysteria, Denver has to fix its defense and hope that OT Ryan Clady rebounds from a knee injury. QB play, of course, is an issue.

25. Redskins -- Donovan McNabb should make the offense better, but the line is still unsettled. The change to a 3-4 defense disrupts a solid unit that doesn't have all the parts for the switch.

26. Chiefs -- A unified coaching staff and better players should help, but a lot depends on QB Matt Cassel. Rookie S Eric Berry could be a difference-maker.

27. Bears -- Jay Cutler will be much better, but will the running game and offensive line improve too? It also hurts to have defensive uncertainties in this division.

28. Lions -- A solid draft class in '09 and the potential of the '10 class, as well as some nice free-agent additions should help. They're still far away overall.

29. Browns -- Cleveland seems to have made upgrades, but you can't win if you don't have a quarterback, which they don't.

30. Panthers -- There is bad karma in Carolina. There is still talent and a lot of gritty players, but a lame duck coach and underlying morale issues could undermine this season.

31. Rams -- First overall pick Sam Bradford is going to take some lumps, but he'll also make some plays. St. Louis still lacks too much talent.

32. Bills -- RB C.J. Spiller was a nice draft choice, and he could be a bright spot if he ever gets room to run. New coach Chan Gailey will have to work miracles to make something of this offense.

© 2010 NFL Enterprises LLC.

underrated29
06-09-2010, 12:04 PM
You hear that...we have to fix our defense..

The #7 ranked defense HAS to be fixed... While I agree, it does, and our defense was Bi-Polar last year...Starting off on record setting pace then the last 3 games were record setting for other teams...

We did IMO fix it pretty darn well.

Timmy!
06-09-2010, 12:06 PM
Wow. I hope this guy didn't actually get paid to write this. Chargers #1 and the Saints #8? Falcons at #7? Really? What a moron.

SR
06-09-2010, 12:18 PM
You're still surprised at this?

DenBronx
06-09-2010, 12:24 PM
What makes you think we deserve to be higher than 24? We were barely average last season. Our defense needs to be fixed because it fizzled down the stretch. I dont care is we were ranked 7th and btw, you can thank Nolan for that. The first half of the season boosted that stat anyway.

arapaho2
06-09-2010, 12:25 PM
Wow. I hope this guy didn't actually get paid to write this. Chargers #1 and the Saints #8? Falcons at #7? Really? What a moron.


its a fan ranking...you know a vote..a poll

Denver Native (Carol)
06-09-2010, 12:30 PM
its a fan ranking...you know a vote..a poll

From article:

"The more I examined teams, their schedules and the like, there's a team in Southern California that is teed up for a big season, and one in crab country not far behind."

That statement does not indicate it was a fan ranking - a vote - a poll, but rather Wyche's opinion only.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 12:47 PM
You hear that...we have to fix our defense..

The #7 ranked defense HAS to be fixed... While I agree, it does, and our defense was Bi-Polar last year...Starting off on record setting pace then the last 3 games were record setting for other teams...

We did IMO fix it pretty darn well.

I trying to be a smart ass but bringing in Jamal Williams, Bannan, Green were brought in to fix the defensive line.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 12:49 PM
What makes you think we deserve to be higher than 24? We were barely average last season. Our defense needs to be fixed because it fizzled down the stretch. I dont care is we were ranked 7th and btw, you can thank Nolan for that. The first half of the season boosted that stat anyway.

If the defense didn't need any fixing then there would have been no need to bring in the three defensive linemen that we brought in.

Italianmobstr7
06-09-2010, 12:55 PM
I think it's funny that we're ranked BEHIND the RAIDERS... That right there tells me all I need to know about this list. Well that, and the fact that the Chargers are ranked 1...

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 12:57 PM
I am not sure what the issue is? :confused:

Our D will be a question. Wink has never been a DC in the NFL let alone a D1 school.

We have an infirmary for an offensive line.

We lost 65% of our offensive production in BM.

There definitely more questionmarks around this team than strengths.

T.K.O.
06-09-2010, 01:08 PM
I am not sure what the issue is? :confused:

Our D will be a question. Wink has never been a DC in the NFL let alone a D1 school.

We have an infirmary for an offensive line.

We lost 65% of our offensive production in BM.

There definitely more questionmarks around this team than strengths.

the issue is we went 8-8 with a far more brutal schedule last year.
with the entire team in their 1st year in a new system with a new qb etc...
the raiders have the worst record in the league in the last 6 years and they are talked about being a playoff team and well ahead of us in this douche's ranking.
i think that's an issue...sure its possible they improve,but mostly because they cant get much worse

Elevation inc
06-09-2010, 01:10 PM
We are ranked twenty-fourth? Another unbeliever. I'm not sure why I am surprised anymore.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d818768f4&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

these same guys are the ones that predicted 4-12 season last year only to get laughed at.....i like it this way gives this team a reason to fight....

i actually am quite happy going into next year, i belive this team is def on the up swing even with out marshall and sheffler and hillis.....orton isnt spectacular but he isnt a Qb that will let this team play 4-12 either....this defense i belive will be improved even more than nolan's was.....i belive and have always belived that while nolan was a good 3-4 guy his ways were becoming stale much like the ZBS, and things shanny liked to do.....i think wink is exactly what this team needs.....our best year in the last 5 was under coyers tutelage and he was a blitz lover....i belive wink is as well....and unlike 2005 we now have a secondary to back up are blitz.....we also will have a very stout 3 front next year, we did just fine with mcbean, fields, and peterson games 1-6, im sure they will be legit for six games again but now the whole DL will stay much fresher.....there isno doubt in my mind are entire Dl is the best we have had as a unit in the last six years....

the questions on this team lie soley on the offense, no doubt to get over a 8-8 hump we must do better on offense....if we do we will easily be battling for at minimum a wild card come december....i think alot of Experts will be soley dissapointed again next year.....

i dont think we start out 6-0 again...but i would wager we lead the division by the san fran game in london.....

you heard it here first folks....

Timmy!
06-09-2010, 01:19 PM
its a fan ranking...you know a vote..a poll

No, it's not.....you know...like you're wrong.

There is, however, a link on that page to a fan ranking. Which makes a LOT more sense to me than this garbage by Wyche...you know...the guy who wrote the article with the power rankings we were discussing.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2010/06/07/saints-top-fan-rankings-32-in-32-series-begins/

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 01:23 PM
the issue is we went 8-8 with a far more brutal schedule last year.
with the entire team in their 1st year in a new system with a new qb etc...
the raiders have the worst record in the league in the last 6 years and they are talked about being a playoff team and well ahead of us in this douche's ranking.
i think that's an issue...sure its possible they improve,but mostly because they cant get much worse

No the 8-8 record and more brutal schedule isn't the issue. Wyche makes it perfectly clear what he sees as the issues. And quite honestly he's right at this point in time. It doesn't mean it wont get resloved before we head into the season but right now the things he pointed out are issues.

Elevation inc
06-09-2010, 01:33 PM
No the 8-8 record and more brutal schedule isn't the issue. Wyche makes it perfectly clear what he sees as the issues. And quite honestly he's right at this point time. It doesn't mean it wont get resloved before we head into the season but right now the things he pointed out are issues.

i agree with the QB play and OL issues, but last year we had QB issues as well...and we started out just fine....i think the only thing i agree with right now isthe OL issues.....but having harris back already is huge he is a big reason are Offense tanked the last six games of the season....even kuper admitted how much he missed harris.....LG was a revolving door till hochstein who filled in admirably...i belive he will do so again, and i think walton is the missing link inside at center......and polumbus is actually a better LT than RT...so who knows maybe we get something out of him...we may get by with him against teams without elite pass rushers....i pretty confident by game 3 our starting OL will be clady, hochstein, walton, kuper, harris, which is just fine.....

underrated29
06-09-2010, 01:36 PM
There definitely more questionmarks around this team than strengths.



See I didn't know question marks were weaknesses. I will not argue that we have lots of questions to be answered.

But I look at it innocent until proven guilty, instead of your view of guilty until proven innocent.


Or in football talk the OLINE is healthy until proven they are not. Instead of Harris and such are injured until they are proven they are healthy.





An unknown is not a weakness. It is an unkown.

Day1BroncoFan
06-09-2010, 01:42 PM
Let the doubters doubt, the believers believe and the idiots write articles.

I think we should be higher than 24. The chargirls at #1 because they have a rookie RB and an easy schedule, yeh right. That's all I need to read of that crap.

nevcraw
06-09-2010, 01:53 PM
I totally agreee with this ranking.

1. Orton as best QB option for now
2. Clady with a limp & Harris' toes finally back in socket
3. Suspect WR corp
4. possible 2 new starters on Center and LG - maybe rookies too.
5. Newbie DC w/ limited 3-4 experience
6. Totally new DL

I can't wait to see it all work - so yes i'm postive - but 24 seems just about right....

dogfish
06-09-2010, 01:55 PM
i think it's beautiful that they have san diego #1. . . . let's hear it for the pre-season champions!



:rofl::rofl::rofl:

LordTrychon
06-09-2010, 01:57 PM
Yeah, I don't know why you were surprised either.

T.K.O.
06-09-2010, 02:07 PM
No the 8-8 record and more brutal schedule isn't the issue. Wyche makes it perfectly clear what he sees as the issues. And quite honestly he's right at this point time. It doesn't mean it wont get resloved before we head into the season but right now the things he pointed out are issues.

no....what i meant was I have an issue with a guy who ranks the raiders well above the broncos...even though there is ZERO evidence that they are a better team .
if anything the fact that we have a year in the system and have made significant steps to shore up the D ,combined with what appears to be an easier schedule should lead a rational person to the conclusion that the broncos are and will remain better than a team who has lost more games over the past 6 or 7 seasons than any other:salute:

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 02:26 PM
See I didn't know question marks were weaknesses. I will not argue that we have lots of questions to be answered.

But I look at it innocent until proven guilty, instead of your view of guilty until proven innocent.

Where did I provide the view point that the team is guilty? :confused:

I didn't!!!!! I never said questionmarks are weaknesses either. I said the team has a lot more questionmarks than strengths.

For me, there are too many unknowns and variables. How could you rank them higher? Most of the teams above us have far less questionmarks and more stability. Would you rank the Broncos above them? :confused:



Or in football talk the OLINE is healthy until proven they are not. Instead of Harris and such are injured until they are proven they are healthy.


Well I guess we will have to agree to disagree. There is enough history with the kinds of injuries our O line has suffered to suspect that it could easily linger into the season.




An unknown is not a weakness. It is an unkown.

Right. Just try not to insinuate that i indicated otherwise or put words in my mouth that I didn't say.

The precise statement: "This team has more questionmarks than strengths" holds true. Nobody knows how they will perform until the games are played and to rank them above teams with far less questionmarks would be silly IMHO.

slim
06-09-2010, 02:28 PM
24 may be a little low, but it is not outrageous.

I would say 18-20 sounds about right.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 05:05 PM
i agree with the QB play and OL issues, but last year we had QB issues as well...and we started out just fine....i think the only thing i agree with right now isthe OL issues.....but having harris back already is huge he is a big reason are Offense tanked the last six games of the season....even kuper admitted how much he missed harris.....LG was a revolving door till hochstein who filled in admirably...i belive he will do so again, and i think walton is the missing link inside at center......and polumbus is actually a better LT than RT...so who knows maybe we get something out of him...we may get by with him against teams without elite pass rushers....i pretty confident by game 3 our starting OL will be clady, hochstein, walton, kuper, harris, which is just fine.....

I didn't think Hochstein did that great of a job but I don't think he's guy we want to start 16 games. We drafted two guys that can play guard and I don't think that's because Kuper is the weak link on the interior line.

Northman
06-09-2010, 05:11 PM
Thats what 8-8 will get ya.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 05:21 PM
Thats what 8-8 will get ya.

I never take the ranking seriously. Sam gave valid reasons for ranking us where he did but it really doesn't matter. What matters is what happens on the field.

underrated29
06-09-2010, 05:24 PM
For me, there are too many unknowns and variables. How could you rank them higher? Most of the teams above us have far less questionmarks and more stability. Would you rank the Broncos above them? :confused:

.


The teams I would rate the broncos higher, then this guy--

Bucs
Raiders
Seahawks
cardinals
texans
9'ers-----They are close and maybe slightly ahead of us, but the other teams are definitely Not, imo.

The bucs are a looong way off
The raiders suck
The seahawks have no offense and defense is getting worse
Cards- No QB, no boldin,
Texans- no defense, inconsistent/bad run game
And I believe should we play any of those teams we would win.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 06:55 PM
no....what i meant was I have an issue with a guy who ranks the raiders well above the broncos...even though there is ZERO evidence that they are a better team .
if anything the fact that we have a year in the system and have made significant steps to shore up the D ,combined with what appears to be an easier schedule should lead a rational person to the conclusion that the broncos are and will remain better than a team who has lost more games over the past 6 or 7 seasons than any other:salute:

Who cares? It's a preseason ranking that means nothing it wont help us to win any games nor will it cause us to lose any games.

gregbroncs
06-09-2010, 07:14 PM
I think it's funny that we're ranked BEHIND the RAIDERS... That right there tells me all I need to know about this list. .
This was my reaction as well. How are we worse than the Raiders?

gregbroncs
06-09-2010, 07:16 PM
No, it's not.....you know...like you're wrong.

There is, however, a link on that page to a fan ranking. Which makes a LOT more sense to me than this garbage by Wyche...you know...the guy who wrote the article with the power rankings we were discussing.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2010/06/07/saints-top-fan-rankings-32-in-32-series-begins/That one looks much better. I hope the Broncos are better than 21 but I could actually understand that ranking to start a year.

LRtagger
06-09-2010, 07:17 PM
Thats what 8-8 will get ya.

So 8-8 gets you a #24 ranking, a 9-7 record gets you a #2 ranking, a 3-13 record gets you a #22 ranking, and a Super Bowl win gets you a #8 ranking.

Makes perfect sense.

BroncoWave
06-09-2010, 07:36 PM
I used to care about preseason rankings, until I figured out that they are completely useless and usually wrong.

Broncolingus
06-09-2010, 07:37 PM
No respect. . .we get no respect

...only one way to fix that, folks.

Win

camdisco24
06-09-2010, 08:26 PM
One of the worst rankings a i've read to date.
Not just because of our position, but about half the other teams positions.
Good laugh though.

TXBRONC
06-09-2010, 09:38 PM
I used to care about preseason rankings, until I figured out that they are completely useless and usually wrong.

They really don't mean anything at any point in the year imo.

jhildebrand
06-09-2010, 11:15 PM
The teams I would rate the broncos higher, then this guy--

Bucs
Raiders
Seahawks
cardinals
texans
9'ers-----They are close and maybe slightly ahead of us, but the other teams are definitely Not, imo.

The bucs are a looong way off
The raiders suck
The seahawks have no offense and defense is getting worse
Cards- No QB, no boldin,
Texans- no defense, inconsistent/bad run game
And I believe should we play any of those teams we would win.

Fair enough! I apologize for coming off so strong in my last reply.

I would disagree with you on the Raiders and Cards.

The Raiders will be pretty decent this year. They actually wont have to dink around with Russell for 3/4 of the season. They had the 7th ranked pass defense. They had a good draft, IMO, and added some nice pieces. I think they are easily an 8-8 team. The same 8-8 we were.


The Cards are much better than Denver. They have a solid D, a good o line and o line coaching. Beanie ran pretty well last year.

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 12:01 AM
Fair enough! I apologize for coming off so strong in my last reply.

I would disagree with you on the Raiders and Cards.

The Raiders will be pretty decent this year. They actually wont have to dink around with Russell for 3/4 of the season. They had the 7th ranked pass defense. They had a good draft, IMO, and added some nice pieces. I think they are easily an 8-8 team. The same 8-8 we were.


The Cards are much better than Denver. They have a solid D, a good o line and o line coaching. Beanie ran pretty well last year.

The Cardinals have been to the playoffs two out of the last three years with Super Bowl birth included they should be ranked higher than the Broncos. I don't like saying that but I think it's true.

TimTebow15MVP
06-10-2010, 12:48 AM
like B Dawks says in his pre game hypeness, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU DO WHEN THEY DONT RESPECT YOU? TAKE ITTTTT!!!!!!!! TAKE ITTTTT!!!!!!!!!

Tempus Fugit
06-10-2010, 02:29 AM
It's a preseason power ranking. It has about as much relevance to the upcoming season as the recipe for Aunt Josephine's peach cobbler. Rosters aren't even finalized yet, so there's no sense in paying attention to these types of articles at this time of the year.

roomemp
06-10-2010, 06:46 AM
What makes you think we deserve to be higher than 24? We were barely average last season. Our defense needs to be fixed because it fizzled down the stretch. I dont care is we were ranked 7th and btw, you can thank Nolan for that. The first half of the season boosted that stat anyway.

What makes me think we should be ranked higher is the Faiders are ranked ahead of us

GGMoogly
06-10-2010, 07:36 AM
If we've lost Wyche and Nfl.com, we've lost middle America! :shocked:

GGMoogly
06-10-2010, 07:38 AM
I'm sorry...who's respect are we looking for, again? :confused:

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 07:40 AM
i'm sorry...who's respect are we looking for, again? :confused:

self.

HORSEPOWER 56
06-10-2010, 07:56 AM
Personally, I love it. Not because we're ranked #24, but because the Sparklers are once again ranked #1. They are the "best team never to ________" for what seems to be the 5th or 6th year in a row again.

Nothing I like better than seeing the Sparkler fans get all worked up over nothing only to be ONE AND DONE year after year...

:elefant:

Lonestar
06-10-2010, 09:28 AM
But you know that everyone can't help but read them.

Knowing what they are going to say, but hope they love your team
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Elevation inc
06-10-2010, 10:59 AM
I didn't think Hochstein did that great of a job but I don't think he's guy we want to start 16 games. We drafted two guys that can play guard and I don't think that's because Kuper is the weak link on the interior line.

i dont think he did great, i think he did admirable, he never ran a zbs before so im certain that had something do do with some of the small issues he had, i think over all orton was a big reason our OL suffered a bit..lol..we are now a full blown offense he is acustomed to....i would prefer Seth olsen or eric olsen to step up and be our Starting LG, but i wouldn't be terribly concerend if we were looking at hochstein as our starting LG.....we could do better, but i think we would be alright....the power system is what he knows.....

TXBRONC
06-10-2010, 03:18 PM
i dont think he did great, i think he did admirable, he never ran a zbs before so im certain that had something do do with some of the small issues he had, i think over all orton was a big reason our OL suffered a bit..lol..we are now a full blown offense he is acustomed to....i would prefer Seth olsen or eric olsen to step up and be our Starting LG, but i wouldn't be terribly concerend if we were looking at hochstein as our starting LG.....we could do better, but i think we would be alright....the power system is what he knows.....

Fair enough.

One thing I absolutely agree with you on is that Orton played a big part in why our offensive line suffered.