NFL.com Puts Ravens 6th in Power Rankings
According to Senior Analyst, Pat Kirwan, the Baltimore Ravens were placed 6th in NFL.com's Power Rankings. The trailed from the top, in order, Pittsburgh, New England, Philadelphia, New York Giants and Indianapolis. While being rated 6th overall out of 32 teams is a pretty impressive start to the season, after last year I'm just not satisfied.
The rankings certainly don't mean anything now, compared to what they'll mean at the end of the season, but as Kirwan states,
"A team ranked in the bottom quarter of this list is sure to make the playoffs; conversely, a team perched up in the top quarter is sure to fall."
As far as his ranking of the Ravens, while I agree with his commentary, I still think the team could have been ranked higher, and as easily high as fourth place. I have no problem with th Steelers derservedly getting top billing, but the next two teams are based on pure speculation. Yes, Philly did make it to the NFC Championship Game just like our Ravens did the same in the AFC, but didn't we demolish them? And while the Patriots with Tom Brady were unbeatable in 2007, which Tom Brady will be at the helm in 2009? I'd definitely put both of them in the top ten, but not in the top five. The Colts are perennially in the top five and they did sort of take care of us last year, so I can see them in it until the end, with or without Marvin Harrison. The New York Giants pushed us all around the Meadowlands and were the favorite to make the Super Bowl, and with their new wide receivers, should be right up there near the top of the rankings.
I also was surprised to Atlanta (7th) and San Diego (8th) ranked so high, and Arizona (9th) and Tennessee (10th) so low. I think you could easily put the Cardinals and Titans in the top five, behind the Steelers, Giants, Colts and Ravens. You could even argue the Cardinals should be ahead of Baltimore and I probably wouldn't argue that, as their passing attack could give us fits. So that would put my Top Ten as:
1.Pittsburgh Steelers
2. New York Giants
3. Indianapolis Colts
4. Baltimore Ravens
5. Arizona Cardinals
6. Tennessee Titans
7. New England Patriots
8. Philadelphia Eagles
9. San Diego Chargers
10. Atlanta Falcons
The next ten teams in the rankings could slip into the bottom half of the top ten, depending on whom you favor rebounding from last year. The Chicago Bears have a new QB and new hope, the Dallas Cowboys hope their troubles are now gone, and the Miami Dolphins fans hope last year wasn't a freak show.
But for now, let's focus on the Top Ten, and tell me your thoughts on the Ravens positioning between Kirwan's analysis and my objections.
0 recs |
32 comments
|
Comments
The NFL has been a gambler's nightmare
For over a decade.
The stock market will never recover, our armies will never again be #1, and our children will drink filthy water for the rest of their lives - HST
by the fix is in on May 23, 2009 11:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Especially last year. That was just craziness all around.
Water covers 2/3 of the Earth's surface. Ed Reed covers the rest.
by Ampallang on May 23, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My only major contention with their “Senior Analyst” is that they have the Eagles ranked higher than us. Maybe Pat Kirwan forgot what McNabb looks like as he rides the bench. The Patriots are a toss-up to me; Brady could get gun shy or he could revert to 2007 form. The other teams slapped us around last year, so I’m fine with having to earn our number one rank one week at a time.
Water covers 2/3 of the Earth's surface. Ed Reed covers the rest.
by Ampallang on May 23, 2009 11:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What is this?
First off you put you put Baltimore BEHIND the Colts. First off, my big problem with everyone putting the Colts way up high is that they lost a ton of their coaching staff, starting with the top and thoroughly working through some major spots. Then they lost a staple on offense, not that that he was the same as he has been, but still not an easy thing to replace. It is lunacy to think that they not only will be the same, but better off? They will struggle, especially out of the gate.
Secondly to think the Eagles have not made huge strides in the offseason is incredible. They lost the NFC Championship game by 2 points. Dawkins left, and it hurts, but man have things worked out from there. Sean Jones should cover a good amount of ground there. Then add arguably the most talented young LT in the league, a great right tackle, the full back that was desperate needed, and then throw a number 1 receiver into the mix with the old number one entering his second year, plus a guy who can help Westbrook take some of the load off of his shoulders, that spells trouble. To base your prediction on one game in the previous season and ignore the rest? Seriously?? Also, the Giants haven’t done nearly that much since they managed to shoot themselves in the foot (or leg as the case may be). What upgrades to the WRs there are you talking about? doesn’t look like much.
Tennessee will be in a lot of trouble. Haynesworth was the linchpin to that D. to take him out of the mix makes a lot of shortcomings more vulnerable. Finnegan had a great year, but I would be surpirsed if he backs it up without someone in the opposing QBs. kitchen every other play. And who will be the QB? Seriously, think about the 2 names you would say. Really think about them. First clue, there are 2.
It’s tough to judge the season right now, that’s for sure. But speculation being what it is, you have to speculate using a good amount of reason. I’ve tried to predict all 32 teams records for a number of years and always find that things just don’t work out like that. I’m usually not even close, no matter the division (spare the Raiders). If you want a fun exercise try that one out, but remember to save your predictions.
It took my two years to come up with an avatar and sig
and this is the best I could come up with.
by einman77 on May 23, 2009 11:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
To base your prediction on one game in the previous season and ignore the rest? Seriously??
Oh, I guess that tie against the Bengals changes everything, right?
by DT711 on May 23, 2009 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're still talking about last season
And individual games at that. That’s the point I was trying to make. I mean the year the Ravens won the Super bowl there was a month without a touchdown. Are you telling me that was the same team that walked off the field in February?
It took my two years to come up with an avatar and sig
and this is the best I could come up with.
by einman77 on May 24, 2009 2:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Colts
The Colts lost Tony Dungy and then fired Ron Meeks and Russ Purnell. I would not call that losing “a ton” of their coaching staff.
Losing Harrison will hurt, but Anthony Gonzalez is ready to become a fulltime, starting WR. He has been very good as a slot and sometime starter on the right side.
The Colts also significantly upgraded their defense through the draft and re-signing DT Ed Johnson. Also, remember that the Colts destroyed the Ravens last year despite Manning playing on one leg, a slew of injuries on defense, and numerous injuries to the o-line. Now, they have an upgraded defense, a dynamic rookie RB, and more depth on o-line.
Remember, you guys lost Bart Scott and your defensive coordinator. Those were big loses.
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue. Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.
by BigBlueShoe on May 23, 2009 9:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
to add in case they weren't keeping up
the OC and OL coach are returning as consultants, and curiously their chosen replacements haven’t been given the OC and OL coach titles yet, so there’s a good chance Moore and Mudd will be heavily involved.
by shake n bake on May 23, 2009 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And lets be honest. So long as Manning can play the Colts will be one of the top teams.
by archon095 on May 23, 2009 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't realize that Mudd would be so involved with the team
That would have been almost as big as Dungy.
It took my two years to come up with an avatar and sig
and this is the best I could come up with.
by einman77 on May 24, 2009 2:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They had to retire because of the Pension Plan rule changes coming
but then were aded as “consultants.” This is just a way aroun the system. There will be little or no changes there.
Bruce Raffel
by Bruce Raffel on May 24, 2009 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and it's not much of a stretch to put team A over team B
when team A laid a 31-3 beating on team B the previous year.
Marvin was the only significant player loss, and he was a shell of his former self ever since he hurt his knee early in 07. His torching of Chris McAllister was his only 80+ yard game (3 for 83) one of just 4 50+ yard games, and were two of his 5 TDs.
by shake n bake on May 23, 2009 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously, they aren't the same team
The team that played that game wasn’t the same team that walked off the Field in January. To base it on that one game alone is just simply shortsighted. They certainly won’t be even close to the one that comes out on to the field in September. What good is making a prediction based on the idea that last year will parallel this one. Also, to put the Giants up there above them because of their wide receivers? I’m still waiting to know what that is about.
I’ll say that Baltimore has a longer window of opportunity than the Eagles, but no way are they better this season. Remember what happened the last time McNabb had a reliable target? Now he has 2, though it will take a bit for Maclin to develop. However, they can be patient for a good 7 months before the Eagles will really need him to step up his game. Meanwhile he will make a huge impact on the return game. Pffft, the Giants.
It took my two years to come up with an avatar and sig
and this is the best I could come up with.
by einman77 on May 24, 2009 2:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can say the same about the Colts not being the same team
that game was in the middle of their 3-4 start with the gutted OL and Manning hobbling.
by shake n bake on May 24, 2009 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah… but Cory Ivy was covering Harrison, and Frank Walker was covering Wayne. Chris McAllister doesn’t count. He was a liability and ALL of our corners were better than him in that game (which isn’t saying much). McAllister hasn’t started a game for the Ravens since that game. Now, he’s off the team, and no one’s rushing to sign him. Our injuries at corner were the only reason that the Colts torched us that game. The last two times that we’ve played the Colts we’ve been decimated at DB. Playing the Colts with decimated secondary = epic fail.
Everyone says that the Colts have our number. I disagree. They were just lucky enough to play us with injuries at DB every time that they’ve played us. Hopefully, this year will be different with our depth at corner.
by BAL_Hawk on May 24, 2009 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Ravens couldn't score on them either
Even with the CBs healthy it’s safe to say Indy would have scored more the 3 points
by shake n bake on May 24, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a new year, and...
Flacco andour offense has one more year experience while Peyton and his boys are one year older! It changes this season!
Bruce Raffel
by Bruce Raffel on May 24, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
True. I’m not saying that we would’ve won, but even you must admit that you were happy when you heard that our corners were banged up. Not only that, but the entire team lost heart when they saw the Colts scoring so easily. We may not have won, but we may have been more successful if Manning was throwing over our defense.
by BAL_Hawk on May 24, 2009 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've said and others disagree that
losing both corners is the hardest position obstacle to overcome. I’d rather lose the starting QB than BOTH corners. A decent QB will make us look silly in that situation, but the offensive playbook doesn’t change too much if Joe goes down and Troy takes over, as unfortunate as that would be.
Bruce Raffel
by Bruce Raffel on May 25, 2009 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would agree with that in general, but it does make a difference who you’re playing. I’d rather lose the QB versus a great offensive team, but I’d rather lose the corners versus a great defensive team.
by BAL_Hawk on May 25, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I personally want the Ravens listed lower.
1) Remeber 2007 when everyone was saying the Ravens will be in Super Bowl XLII after a 13-3 2006 season record?
2) Remeber last season when everyone was saying the Ravens would be luck to win 7 games?
Take the Ravens for gratned and put them in the lower half of the rankings, that always seems to light a fire under the team.
by Strangebru727 on May 23, 2009 1:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rexx's and Pats rankings
They both have their wrinkles, but Rexx’s seem more fair.
First off, no way NE should be in the top 5 in Kirwan’s rankings. I think they are a #2 caliber team, but before the season starts, they should not be in the top 5. No team that did not make the playoffs last year deserves to be in the top 5. Tom Brady will turn that team around for sure and I expect them to be in M&T Bank stadium come the AFCC.
To einman77, it is fair to put the Colts at 3. They may have lost this and that, as I think that Dungy retiring will affect these guys a little, but they got a young and enthusiastic coach much like we did last year. Yes they lost Marvin, but he was not going to be a difference maker with Wayne and Gonzalez back there. They improved their running game vastly with the 1st round selection of Donald Brown who will now pair with Addai. They still have one of the top 3 D-Line’s in the game, watch out for Fili Moala, Haloti’s brother. Then Freeney, Mathis, and what I think is one of the most underrated secondaries in the league. Oh yea, they got the Manning guy. He is pretty good.
Now the Eagles. I am more unsure if they should be 8 rather than 3 like in Kirwan’s rankings. I really like what they did in the offseason, had one of the best this year. Yes, losing Dawkins to the Eagle fans and players is much like us losing Ray Lewis. Dawkins was the team leader hands down and one of the best safeties of all time. But, the Eagles had my favorite draft this year. Pairing Maclin with DeSean Jackson is going to be so sick to watch this year. Then adding McCoy to back up the most versatile RB in the league, Brian Westbrook. I also think that Cornelius Ingrum will step up big time for Phily.
Einman77, I understand where you come from with Phily not being worthy of #3, but is it because of what we did to them? I mean, they beat the best team in football last year, NYG, 2 times 1 of which was in the playoffs. McNabb is still IMO a top 5 QB in this league. He was able to make Chicken Salad with Chicken Shit on offense last year with Westbrook being hurt a good amount and not having a WR outside of Jackson.
I see the Titans honestly finishing 3rd, maybe 4th in their division. Haynesworth was their defense. He is the most dominating player defensively in the NFL, and losing him is huge. I think a lot of what their 2ndary was able to do was because of the pressure he brought. I see their defense falling out of the top 10. Houston is going to give the division a run for its money. If Schaub stays healthy, that offense is freaking scary. I am also a fan of their defense. They added my favorite LB in the draft, Brian Cushing, to play alongside the beast in Demeco Ryans. Their line is one of the elite in the league with Mario, Akoye and now Connor Barwin. I see a 10 win season and a wild card spot from Houston next year.
My rankings go like this:
Infinity: Cleveland Browns
1. Baltimore Ravens
2. Detroit Lions
You have to hate losing more than you love winning.
by Mr MaLoR on May 23, 2009 1:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the thought
I was off on the Colts because I thought their entire coaching staff went through some major changes. I didn’t realize exactly the “retirement” to be not a retirement at all. I’ll retract that claim, sounds like things are a lot more stable than I though over there. Anyway, I’ll be rooting for you guys. I just can’t stand the squealers, and I don’t think Cincy or Cleveland have come far enough along to knock them off their perch.
It took my two years to come up with an avatar and sig
and this is the best I could come up with.
by einman77 on May 24, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Browns are at least at double infinity, possibly higher. C’mon, give us some credit.
by BradyQuinnisBeast on May 30, 2009 3:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’d put the falcons, titans, colts, pats and cardinals above the ravens within the the top 10 list simply because they can outscore us despite our D… with Chris Johnson, the titans had us looking for our jocks. we flat out can’t beat the colts and pats (and coaching doesn’t matter with the colts as payton calls the show anyway- dungie was along for the ride. the cardinals and their O would probably school us with our unoiled and misfiring O engine.
what are the ravens being based on? 4 games against ohio (thank god for this every year). 3 loses to pitt.. barely a split with tenn. an ass beating by the G-men. thrown into the Indy shredder. out of all years this #6 ranking is totally misguided. i believe we are high middle of the pack with our current O. the D keeps us from a 20+ ranking again.
by raven on May 23, 2009 11:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He makes great points
You have to hate losing more than you love winning.
by Mr MaLoR on May 24, 2009 2:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd bet raven would be singing a different tune
if we’d have gotten that big name receiver he wanted us to!
Bruce Raffel
by Bruce Raffel on May 24, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Glad no one argued against the Steel Curtain
Deservedly at number 1. Frank the Tank is going to do to Ray what Ray did to Mendenhall last year.
by Johnny_S on May 26, 2009 12:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Can’t argue with much a Steeler fan says at this point….I would be singing a different tune if we had a receiver to balance mason. i’m done going there anymore…we will always ride the D and expect miracles from our QB. it was sad how many qb’s had to take the fall for our lack of receivers and coaching. 50% of a qb’s success is his receivers but they take the quick blame. this actually makes what Flacco did very impressive.
we never really had a stable O game plan over the course of last year. we never really knew who the feature back was game to game. outside of mason, flacco probably didn’t know who was going to be healthy at TE and other receiver. what’s crazy is that he will enter this season with the same uncertainty and be expected to repeat last years success. unfortunately, this formula will again come up short against the A-1’s.
i think we have always gotten the most out of our talent. this does not leave room for error. we rely heavily on turnovers and ed reed. what keeps us from A-1 status is that we can’t overcome mistakes against the better teams. we don’t have offensive “make-up” power against division leaders. not many teams do. what i love most about our team, however, is that we have a chance to win very game every week. when we go to MT stadium we expect to win. this is a great formula for the long, long run. i can’t ask for more than that. our conservative approach to free agency and the draft ensures years of success and A-2 performance. i struggle with the thought of risking that to be A-1 for just a few years with the possibility of spending years below .500 to make up for a hundred million dollar aquisition error.
We’ll leave the Orioles to the poor live preserver flinging free agent signings. we see how that road ends.
i accept this ravens team because we have the possibility to win. as long as the possibility is there, the beer is cold and the tailgate parties are awesome. if not being World Champion makes me bitter, that is the best bitter in the world.
by raven on May 26, 2009 1:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
50% of a qb’s success is his receivers but they take the quick blame. this actually makes what Flacco did very impressive.
Either that… or our receivers are a little better than you give them credit for.
by BAL_Hawk on May 26, 2009 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
id admit that but they had kyle boller to bust out with and didn’t. seriously though, their not bad. their serviceable. they’ll make some first downs and get the D some rest but they can’t be counted on to take it home with any consistancy.
by raven on May 27, 2009 10:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 








