When people see the word overrated associated to a player, coach or a team overall, it usually has a negative connotation despite the fact that the word doesn't automatically mean that the subject in question is bad. You can be overrated and still be good. But at the same time, the subject in question should not be as hyped as they are made out to be.
Over the course of the 2016 offseason, I have seen five teams being hovered around to do some big things in 2016 and those teams may very well end up doing just that. However, with the way each of these five teams is currently constructed, there seems to be a lot more questions than answers surround each of these NFL franchises.
I think that these five teams are the most overrated teams in the NFL entering this season. Again, that doesn't mean that I think that of these teams will be bad, but I don't think each of these franchises are worth the hype at the moment.
Top five overrated teams entering the 2016 season
Look, this is Baltimore Beatdown and people will think that I am being biased against the Steelers but I am not. I think the Steelers will make the playoffs this year. However, I keep seeing analysts put the Steelers as a top three team in the NFL. Some even have them as the best team in the AFC. And I keep thinking to myself, what have the Steelers done over the course of the offseason to warrant this kind of praise?
Steelers tight end Heath Miller has retired, wide receiver Martavis Bryant is facing a year-long suspension, running back Le'Veon Bell is a bit injury prone and the Steelers defense is still suspect. Do I think the Steelers are a top 10 team? Yes. Do I think the Steelers are a top five team? No, I do not.
The Packers are always talked about in the NFC North as the favorite as many recognize Aaron Rodgers to be the best quarterback in the NFL. Too bad the Packers didn't even win the NFC North division last year the Minnesota Vikings did. The Packers are a one man band led by Rodgers and we see what that team looks like when Packers wide receivers can't get open. Yet NFL.com, for example, listed the Packers as the fourth best team in the NFL.
The Packers are not running away with the NFC North at this point in time.
After the Jaguars selected defensive back Jalen Ramsey and linebacker Myles Jack in the 2016 NFL Draft, many have praised the Jaguars (Which is warranted those look like very good picks) but some have gone too far in claiming that the Jaguars are the next big thing in the AFC. Let's pump the breaks on that one for a bit. The Jaguars have a nice young roster with quarterback Blake Bortles and a good core of wide receivers in Allen Hurns and Allen Robinson.
But the Jaguars have yet to prove to be dangerous on the field. The Jaguars as a franchise has won five games or less in each of the last five seasons and the organization hasn't had a winning record since 2007. Of course, that could change soon, but let's see the team win some games before we start anointing the Jaguars as the best team in the AFC South.
2.) Oakland Raiders
The Raiders have been pushed by pundits over the last couple of seasons as a team on the rise and some pick them as a trendy pick to make the playoffs from time to time. In the NFL.com power rankings earlier this week, I saw the Raiders ranked as the 11th best team in the NFL.
The Raiders haven't had a winning record since 2002. Yes, Raiders quarterback Derek Carr has a lot of talent. He's young and he improves just about every season. But we need to see more from him on offense and we need to see Raiders linebacker Khalil Mack lead his defense to be one of the better units in the league consistently.
1.) Denver Broncos
Yes, the defending Super Bowl champions are overrated. Why? Because Broncos fans and other media pundits are going around claiming that this is a top five team in the NFL with Mark Sanchez as their starting quarterback. People keep saying that the Broncos are a top five team because they won the Super Bowl with a struggling, older quarterback in Peyton Manning with an excellent defense.
Let's get something straight here. Number one, Manning on his worst day is better than Sanchez. Sanchez has done nothing in the NFL but turns the ball over at a high rate over the course of his career. Manning, despite his struggles on the field, prepares better for an NFL arguably more than any other quarterback in NFL history. That has to count for something.
There seems to be this notion that because Manning was pretty bad by his standards during the 2015 season, that the Broncos can win a Super Bowl with any quarterback. If that is the case, why did the Broncos decide to bench quarterback Brock Osweiler in favor of Manning late in the 2015 season?
And I have to say, this hype surrounding the Broncos has struck a nerve with me personally because, during the early years of Joe Flacco's career with the Ravens, a lot of people tried to disrespect Flacco and the Ravens because he was the starting quarterback. Some even said at the time that Flacco isn't good enough to lead the Ravens to a Super Bowl win despite the fact that the Ravens had a pretty good Ravens defense on his side from 2008-2011.
But Sanchez is good enough to lead the Broncos to a Super Bowl win? Are you kidding me? Sanchez is a slightly better version of Kyle Boller and Ravens fans don't need to tell Broncos fans what the result of that was.