The real top 10

[Pinseeker75]

1- Baltimore - to be the champ you have to beat the champ
2- Broncos
3- 49ers
4- Packers
5- Pats
6- Seahawks
7- Saints
8- Bengals
9- Colts
10-Falcons

 

[cdumler7]

I never understand why people can't just say "My Top 10." Why do they have to use the words "Real" or "Un-Biased." Both just really mean jack squat. A top 10 list is always unbiased and unless you are just really really lucky your "Real" top 10 will most likely not be true by the end of the year.

 

[Pinseeker75]

I never understand why people can't just say "My Top 10." Why do they have to use the words "Real" or "Un-Biased." Both just really mean jack squat. A top 10 list is always unbiased and unless you are just really really lucky your "Real" top 10 will most likely not be true by the end of the year.

I agree with you, it's like ranking elite QBs. To close to call in an official order. Really picking the top 10 teams in any order is hard enough.....

 

[cdumler7]

I agree with you, it's like ranking elite QBs. To close to call in an official order. Really picking the top 10 teams in any order is hard enough.....

So why did you decide to use the word "Real" in your title then? I guess it does get more looks than if you just put My top 10.

 

[Pinseeker75]

So why did you decide to use the word "Real" in your title then? I guess it does get more looks than if you just put My top 10.

Yep

 

[Clayton]

1- Baltimore - to be the champ you have to beat the champ

Because repeat champs are common in the NFL? Especially ones who overhaul their roster?

The STL Cardinals weren't favorites to repeat after their WS win 2 years ago and I didn't think that was too unfair.

 

[Pinseeker75]

Because repeat champs are common in the NFL? Especially ones who overhaul their roster?

The STL Cardinals weren't favorites to repeat after their WS win 2 years ago and I didn't think that was too unfair.

Anyone picked above the Ravens at this point are paper champs plain and simple! Will they repeat? Odds are no, but until someone proves otherwise then that's where they stay.....

 

[cdumler7]

Anyone picked above the Ravens at this point are paper champs plain and simple! Will they repeat? Odds are no, but until someone proves otherwise then that's where they stay.....

So then shouldn't the teams be ranked by exactly how they finished last year because until proven otherwise no non-playoff team should even come close to touching a top 10 list (looking at the Saints being in your top 10).

 

[Money]

Because repeat champs are common in the NFL? Especially ones who overhaul their roster?

The STL Cardinals weren't favorites to repeat after their WS win 2 years ago and I didn't think that was too unfair.

Yeah...because standing pat with the same roster has been proven to be the formula for sustained success.

 

[Money]

Anyone picked above the Ravens at this point are paper champs plain and simple! Will they repeat? Odds are no, but until someone proves otherwise then that's where they stay.....

 

[cdumler7]

Yeah...because standing pat with the same roster has been proven to be the formula for sustained success.

One could argue the same for completely overhauling a roster though with not being met with sustained success either. Now yes overhauling can be proven to be good in the long haul of things but usually in the short term it rarely leads to success. Philly overhauled their roster after going 10-6 and filled it with pro-bowl players then went on to go 8-8 then 4-12. (Also it can backfire in the long run if those players brought in do not pan out)

 

[Money]

One could argue the same for completely overhauling a roster though with not being met with sustained success either. Now yes overhauling can be proven to be good in the long haul of things but usually in the short term it rarely leads to success. Philly overhauled their roster after going 10-6 and filled it with pro-bowl players then went on to go 8-8 then 4-12. (Also it can backfire in the long run if those players brought in do not pan out)

The Ravens "overhauled" their roster after the 2010 season. They followed that up with an AFCCG appearance and Lombardi-winning season.

 

[USCDoom]

Why not 12, that is how many playoff teams there are. This is how I rank them based on what I think they will do this year.

1. Atlanta
2. San Fransisco
3. Denver
4. Green Bay
5. Houston
6. New York Giants
7. Cincinnati
8. St. Louis
9. Indianapolis
10. Baltimore
11. New England
12. Detroit

 

[The Pimp Of Eloquence]

Never agreed that the prior year champions get ranked #1 because I simply do not agree with the premise that the best team wins the championship every year.

 

[Tai Chi≈Surfing]

Bengals ?? ..... Really ????

 

[Clayton]

Yeah...because standing pat with the same roster has been proven to be the formula for sustained success.

I agree but sustained success and immediate success are usually 2 different things

 

[Tai Chi≈Surfing]

Why not 12, that is how many playoff teams there are. This is how I rank them based on what I think they will do this year.

1. Atlanta
2. San Fransisco
3. Denver
4. Green Bay
5. Houston
6. New York Giants
7. Cincinnati
8. St. Louis
9. Indianapolis
10. Baltimore
11. New England
12. Detroit

C'mon Man!!! How badly did you want to install the Bucs in that #12 spot instead of the Lions ?

 

[cdumler7]

The Ravens "overhauled" their roster after the 2010 season. They followed that up with an AFCCG appearance and Lombardi-winning season.

Overhauled the roster? Looking at the two rosters it is not even close to how much they overhauled it this past season. They still had the core of the defense exactly the same and pretty much the same on offense as well with the core exactly the same.

 

[DaBearsShowPride]

Why not 12, that is how many playoff teams there are. This is how I rank them based on what I think they will do this year.

1. Atlanta
2. San Fransisco
3. Denver
4. Green Bay
5. Houston
6. New York Giants
7. Cincinnati
8. St. Louis
9. Indianapolis
10. Baltimore
11. New England
12. Detroit

This is the Biggest Joke of a top 10 list I have ever seen. He includes Cinici, St. Louis, Indy, Detroit but the Seahawks, Bears, Saints, Redskins get left out and they will all be better than the teams that are a joke to be on the list.

 

[Money]

Overhauled the roster? Looking at the two rosters it is not even close to how much they overhauled it this past season. They still had the core of the defense exactly the same and pretty much the same on offense as well with the core exactly the same.

After 2010, they lost:

Derrick Mason - Starter
Todd Heap - Starter
Leron McClain - Starter
Kelly Gregg - Starter
Dawan Landry - Starter
Josh Wilson - Starter
Fabian Washington - Starter (beginning of 2010, replaced by Webb during the season, but still the nickel CB)

They also lost Willis McGahee and Chris Chester who were very important backups who went on to be starters for the teams they signed with.

No team lost more that year. Many actually dubbed 2011 as a rebuilding year for the Ravens.

I give you that the intangibles lost with Lewis and Reed are a different dynamic this year, but there is still a great deal of veteran leadership on this team that has simply rested in the shadows of those two great leaders. The "true" leadership of the Ravens rests in the ownership, front office and coaching staff.

You also need to factor in that the Lewis and Reed losses are greatly offset by the returns of a healthy Webb and Suggs.

I totally get where you are coming from, but there is a tremendous amount of both talent and leadership on this team. Ozzie is a mastermind of both the draft and free agent additions (that are more about fitting the character of the team than big names). There are many players ready to step up who will be huge free agent signings of other teams two years down the road (like Ellerbe, Kruger, Cary Williams, etc.). You also need to factor in signings like Dumervil, Huff, Canty and Daryl Smith who are hungry for success. This isn't even counting what I feel could be their best and deepest draft in years (including the one that netted them Flacco and Rice).