ESPN Power Rankings

[JMR]

Power rankings don't matter. They are just something to talk about.

Yeah, we banter back and forth here about what teams/players are better than others, which also doesn't matter. It also doesn't keep us from doing it (including those who are saying the power rankings don't matter). Nothing anybody says here really matters.

/////////////

Also, power rankings aren't predictions. they're a pulse check, a current snapshot in time.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

any power rating doesn't matter

True, but I'll at least entertain it later in the season ... by week 10 or so your starting to see the good teams start to separate themselves a little...

 

[JMR]

Surprised to see Seattle #1, mainly because of the state of the OL. Enough unknowns there that I would expect a safer choice like Carolina or Arizona.

I think 12 is too high for Ravens -- probably would drop them down to 15 or 16.

 

[PDay8810]

Meh. I think most of us like talking about football. Interesting to hear knowledgeable fans argue for and against their teams. Generally better insight than most of the talking heads who spend very little time analyzing each team.

I also think people on this site like football and enjoy talking about football. Many here know the game and bring solid opinions each week. Just seems to me those posters don't post a great deal in the power ranking threads. Those talking heads you mention are opinions, and power ranking threads remain opinions based on opinions.

but hey....just an opinion...

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Power rankings don't matter. They are just something to talk about.

Agreed... I'll pay attention a bit later in the season ... It always ends up being an opinion anyway ..

 

[Hank Kingsley]

You might want to slow the roll on Carr.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Derek Carr: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics

I'm only comparing him to Smith and Whomever the Fuck in Denver.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

And this just in, statistics are for losers.....

 

[cdumler7]

You might want to slow the roll on Carr.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Derek Carr: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics

Haha I tried to point this out before and man it did not go over well with Raiders fans. I think Carr is an average QB that is given such a volume of throws that it inflates his stats and this article definitely agrees with that. He had one of the lowest yards per completion of any QB over the last 5 years. He hardly ever threw past 5 yards his rookie year so of course he has a high completion percentage and doesn't turn the ball over a ton. That doesn't mean he is a good QB though as we see they just don't move the ball as well as his stats sometimes suggest.

 

[cdumler7]

I'm only comparing him to Smith and Whomever the Fuck in Denver.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

And this just in, statistics are for losers.....

Well when the statistics match that of the team's record and struggles on offense then I would say they can be used as a tool to show why a team is good or bad at something. Yes you have to be careful with stats but honestly that is exactly what this article is trying to say. So many people point to the fact that Carr puts up so many Fantasy points to show he is a great QB and well Fantasy success doesn't always mean success in reality for football.

 

[Hank Kingsley]

Well when the statistics match that of the team's record and struggles on offense then I would say they can be used as a tool to show why a team is good or bad at something. Yes you have to be careful with stats but honestly that is exactly what this article is trying to say. So many people point to the fact that Carr puts up so many Fantasy points to show he is a great QB and well Fantasy success doesn't always mean success in reality for football.

I could not give a shit about Fantasy.

I simply think he's better than Smith is going to be or Sanchez or whomever.

And Oakland is ascending.

 

[cdumler7]

I could not give a shit about Fantasy.

I simply think he's better than Smith is going to be or Sanchez or whomever.

And Oakland is ascending.

I would take Smith over him right now. To me Smith honestly has impressed me quite a bit over the last couple of years. He has really discovered even more the weapon that he has with his legs and we have seen with him finally having a weapon like Maclin that he is willing to push the ball down the field just a bit more. He is still very cautious and maybe too cautious but you can win a lot of games with Smith. So far we haven't seen that Carr can help win a lot of games for his team. He has a terrible record since being drafted. Now while some of that is the team around him he still has made critical mistakes at the worst time in the game plenty of times.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

There's a just as compelling, probably moreso, argument Carr is the 3rd best QB in the West right now as there is to say he's above average. One's actually backed up by effeciency stats here is the thing; the other is based on 8 games and flashes. 24 games do not outweigh 8. Or alternatively, 8 games are just as valuable as the other 8 if you want to ignore Carr's rookie year.

Did people not learn their leason with counting stats such as touchdowns when Nick Foles was still in Philly? Carr is definitely better than Foles was, but the hype is getting silly for a guy whom's YPA looks like a below average starter. Kacsmer does a pretty good job of throwing cold water on the Carr bandwagon. This time last year Bridgewater was a pretty trendy QB.

 

[cdumler7]

There's a just as compelling, probably moreso, argument Carr is the 3rd best QB in the West right now as there is to say he's above average. One's actually backed up by effeciency stats here is the thing; the other is based on 8 games and flashes. 24 games do not outweigh 8. Or alternatively, 8 games are just as valuable as the other 8 if you want to ignore Carr's rookie year.

Did people not learn their leason with counting stats such as touchdowns when Nick Foles was still in Philly? Carr is definitely better than Foles was, but the hype is getting silly for a guy whom's YPA looks like a below average starter. Kacsmer does a pretty good job of throwing cold water on the Carr bandwagon. This time last year Bridgewater was a pretty trendy QB.

Agree. I remember reading something about how Carr's YPA was the 2nd lowest they have seen in the last 5 years. Now that one stat doesn't prove everything but coupled with some others such as the Raiders being one of the worst teams in yards per drive and Carr having a very average touchdowns per pass attempts it just shows he is not a very efficient QB but is more of a high volume QB. Doesn't mean he can't improve but it does seem people are so obsessed with Fantasy Football numbers that they will pump up a guy that puts up big numbers over a guy that actually helps his team win.

 

[Money]

Doesn't mean he can't improve but it does seem people are so obsessed with Fantasy Football numbers that they will pump up a guy that puts up big numbers over a guy that actually helps his team win.

Oddly enough, this isn't your stance when talking about Joe Flacco.

 

[Hank Kingsley]

I would take Smith over him right now. To me Smith honestly has impressed me quite a bit over the last couple of years. He has really discovered even more the weapon that he has with his legs and we have seen with him finally having a weapon like Maclin that he is willing to push the ball down the field just a bit more. He is still very cautious and maybe too cautious but you can win a lot of games with Smith. So far we haven't seen that Carr can help win a lot of games for his team. He has a terrible record since being drafted. Now while some of that is the team around him he still has made critical mistakes at the worst time in the game plenty of times.

I agree, Smith is bland tofu..... Never going to win anything of note.

Not saying Carr will but at least he still has time.

 

[cdumler7]

Oddly enough, this isn't your stance when talking about Joe Flacco.

Couple of things here...

1) People are trying to pump Carr up to be a top-10 QB in the league and the next big thing at the position. I view him as an average QB. Doesn't mean he can't win as the team gets more talent around him but I just don't think he will be a big reason they do win. See that is the thing is there are QB's who are helped by their team and then QB's that carry their team. To me a guy like Rodgers, Manning (in his prime), and Brady are QB's that raise the level of the team beyond maybe what the talent around them is or should be.

2) I've never said that Flacco is a bad QB. I just don't view him as a top-10 QB either. I think he was carried early in his career by a great defense and strong running game. They didn't ask him to do a whole lot. Now that he is getting paid the big bucks and the quality of the team has went down around him we have seen him struggle to continue at that same winning level as earlier in his career.

 

[Broncos6482]

I'm only comparing him to Smith and Whomever the Fuck in Denver.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

And this just in, statistics are for losers.....

I'd take Rivers and Smith over Carr in the West. I agree with you though that he's better than anyone Denver will trot out this season.

And I'd rather look at statistics over feelings.

 

[packerzrule]

True, but I'll at least entertain it later in the season ... by week 10 or so your starting to see the good teams start to separate themselves a little...

true that - it is a decent barometer to gauge how the teams stack up to one another but no indication of how they will end

that is why I take any of these polls with a grain of salt - lessin of course the Packers are in first

 

[flyerhawk]

Couple of things here...

1) People are trying to pump Carr up to be a top-10 QB in the league and the next big thing at the position. I view him as an average QB. Doesn't mean he can't win as the team gets more talent around him but I just don't think he will be a big reason they do win. See that is the thing is there are QB's who are helped by their team and then QB's that carry their team. To me a guy like Rodgers, Manning (in his prime), and Brady are QB's that raise the level of the team beyond maybe what the talent around them is or should be.

In fairness, there are not many QBs that carried their teams to victory in their first 3 or 4 seasons. Brady wasn't the Brady we are familiar with until his 6th or 7th season.

Not saying that Carr will be great or bad. Just that it is early in his career to use that sort of metric.

 

[chf]

Carr passed my eyeball test when he played the Seahawks. He wasn't intimidated. He made throws under duress. He didn't win the game, but certainly wasn't the reason they lost it. Will he ever be elite? Dunno. But for a young guy, I'd certainly be optimistic at least if I were a Raider fan.

Seems like he could be a Matt Hasselback at least.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

Well I did say I think the Packers are overrated. But I think your discrediting the Packers gains while glossing over the Steelers losses. Nelson makes a huge difference to their offense. And you're right, we don't know what Lacy will bring, but he should be better.

And like I said, I don't trust Roethlisberger to stay healthy. The way he plays just causes him to take too many hits, I wouldn't be surprised at all if he misses time. Bell is out 4 games, and although Williams is a nice back up, he's not on Bell's level. No Bryant, which means defenses can force more of their attention on slowing down Brown. Can Green ever get healthy to give them a tight end to throw to? Can Wheaton or Heyward-Bey emerge as a second receiving threat?

Oh, and just injecting youth into the secondary doesn't mean it's going to get better. It could, but that's more of a guess than projecting Lacy to have a better year for the Packers.

Steelers definitely have a lot of questions...

Ben is certainly no guarantee to stay healthy because of the way he plays, we've learned that over the years. But last year he was the least pressured QB in the NFL, so there's that stat to think about.

Bell may or may not miss 4 games. Appeal is still pending. But last year Williams proved more than capable of handling the load in Bell's absence. He rushed for 204yds & 3 TD's in Bell's 2-game absence last season. He's definitely not the same caliber of player, but the offense as a whole will not suffer without Bell. The ground game starts in the trenches, and their offensive line is still a cohesive unit.

Bryant's loss is the more questionable void. Wheaton & DHB are sporadic. Sammie Coates has a lot of potential, but has yet to put all the pieces together. Bryant's TD production will be hard to replace.

Green is a bit of an enigma at the moment. Not sure what to think about his situation, but whether its headaches or ankle issues, his interviews this offseason make me think that he is going to play. Just a question of when. Jesse James is a player to watch. Heath Miller's retirement may seem like a huge void on the outside, but considering he only had 60 catches & 2 TDs last season, its easily replaceable. It will be tougher to replace his locker room presence. James had 56 catches & 1 TD last season as a rookie so there's no reason to think that he can't fill Miller's shoes. He has also proved that he can handle the blocking assignments.