NFL Power rankings have Packers at #2

Beagle

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
189
Reaction score
33
Location
London, UK
What do you guys make of these rankings? I know it's all a bit meaningless at this stage but your team, on paper, looks like the best in the NFC by some margin.


RANK1

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

PATRIOTS

New England recaptures the top spot by virtue of a stellar draft. One notion Bill Belichick has derived from those whimsical jaunts on Jimmy Johnson's boat out in the Keys: Acquire as many picks as possible, so you can get as many players off your big board as possible. Well, the Patspicked up 11 newbies, beginning with first-rounder Malcom Brown, who immediately firms up the soft underbelly of a Pats defense devoid of Vince Wilfork.


RANK2

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

PACKERS


I'm not sure any general manager knows what he's doing more than Ted Thompson. Green Bay quite simply elevated its talent base this past weekend, while dotting some I's and crossing some needs along the way. If we had to nitpick anything, we'd point out that Damarious Randalland Quinten Rollins are CB/S tweeners. But the Pack needed a nickel, and I could see Randall filling that role just fine when Green Bay opens at Soldier Field. (Oh, and by the way, I'm leaning toward Green Bay in Super Bowl 50.)


RANK3

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

SEAHAWKS


The Seahawks fall back to Earth, as part of the fallout from a so-so draft. For the third year in a row, Seattle didn't make a selection on Day 1. (In 2013 and '14, the 'Hawks traded their first-round pick to Minnesota; this year, they sent the selection to New Orleans in the Jimmy Grahamtrade.) While Seattle got leapfrogged by the team that bested it in a classic Super Bowl three months ago, much of that had to do with New England's college haul. Meanwhile, with Green Bay also having a better draft -- and home-field in this year's head-to-head matchup, an advantage the Seahawks thoroughly enjoyed in every recent bout against the Packers -- Seattle now resides in the three hole. Most draftniks thought the Seahawks reached on their top selection, second-round DE Frank Clark. OK. But former K-State star Tyler Lockett could contribute right away. Here's hoping Darrell Bevell thinks he's more aggressive to the ball than Ricardo Lockette.

RANK4

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

CARDINALS



It might be all the rage to say Seattle could get toppled in the NFC West this year, but we're not there yet. Arizona had itself a fine draft, particularly with the selection of offensive tackle D.J. Humphries. David Johnson, a running back nabbed in the third round, could end up playing the most snaps this season. All that said, Carson Palmer must put up a bigger -- or more efficient -- campaign than normal for the Cards to take the division. (How about 3,700 yards, 28 TDs and a 100 passer rating?) Cardinal to keep an eye on: Bucannon, Deone.

RANK5

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

COLTS

Ugh. Well, your hack writer thought the Colts would get a defensive stud in the first round to support his Super Bowl 50 prediction. Nope. GM Ryan Grigson went all Best Player Available on us and took speedy wideout Phillip Dorsett. He'll need to do something -- despite the fact that production could be limited, given Indy's truckload of targets -- or everyone will complain about a club this close not drafting a guy who can club running backs coming through the hole. DEHenry Anderson, a third-round selection, must get it going quickly ... like Week 1.


RANK6

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

COWBOYS

Plenty of folks were disappointed with Dallas not drafting a running back. After hearing Stephen Jones speak on SiriusXM NFL Radio, I think the Cowboys felt that no running back after a certain point (like, late in Day 2) was going to beat out Darren McFadden, Joseph Randle and Lance Dunbaranyway. The 'Boys carry three backs ... McFadden has had huge days in the NFL before. Randle averaged 6.7 yards per carry last year. And Dunbar is flat-out explosive -- he will be a third-down guy, for certain. So let's put a muzzle on the "Why didn't they replace DeMarco?"whining.
 

thisisnate

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,627
Reaction score
185
Location
Maine
Easier to think of power tiers rather than 1-32 rankings I think, and the Packers are certainly up their in the top tier.
 

armand34

Cheesehead
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
273
Location
The Beach, NJ
TBH, after the high of SB45, I feel it would be a disappointment to not get one more under Rodgers. You figure he can play for another 6 seasons (including 2015) or so making him 37 years old (already) at the tail end of that. 6 Seasons is a long time and you know Cobb & Nelson probably won't be in GB after that time. After this season, my expectations are higher then usual for 2015.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
The Packers are for sure one of the best teams in the league, but as long as we don't beat the Seahawks I wouldn't rank us above Seattle.
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,471
Reaction score
1,848
Location
Land 'O Lakes
It's good for the media to like the Packers' chances, but I'm sure some quick research would show that we've been pre-season favorites to win the Super Bowl every year since 2009. They proved correct 1 out of 5 times. They are right that we should be in contention at the end of the year, and that's every GM's job is to provide the horsepower to get you there. The coaches and players themselves have to give the final push to win it all with the tools in hand.

I actually like the current Cowboys and think that the Week 14 game will get flexed if it isn't Fox's game of the week.
 
OP
OP
Beagle

Beagle

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
189
Reaction score
33
Location
London, UK
Looks to me like the homework was done for the draft and you're in as good a position as is realistically possible at this stage of the pre-season.

You're better than the Seahawks because you're a more rounded team, and if Wilson get's hurt, and with his rushing yardage he's bound to eventually, they'll fall of a cliff. The Pats I constantly underestimate and I find it really difficult to call how good they're going to be, so let them sit on top of the list because they're just weird (and they..ahem...cheat..ahem).

I suppose you never know, look at how the Giants fell apart after their Superbowl win, I don't know anyone who called that. Roll on September.
 

GoPGo

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
1,862
Reaction score
150
The Packers are for sure one of the best teams in the league, but as long as we don't beat the Seahawks I wouldn't rank us above Seattle.
That can't be the only reasoning on where to rank a team. There are several factors that contribute to us being ranked ahead of Seattle. We were the better team in the second half of last season. We beat the snot out of them for 55 minutes until an absolutely bizarre string of luck gave them a freak win. 9 times out of 10 we win that game. We've had a better offseason in the opinion of this writer, so there's plenty of reason to put us ahead of them at this point.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
That can't be the only reasoning on where to rank a team. There are several factors that contribute to us being ranked ahead of Seattle. We were the better team in the second half of last season. We beat the snot out of them for 55 minutes until an absolutely bizarre string of luck gave them a freak win. 9 times out of 10 we win that game. We've had a better offseason in the opinion of this writer, so there's plenty of reason to put us ahead of them at this point.

The Seahawks haven´t declined to a sufficient degree to move the Packers ahead of them though. They will return most of their starters (aside on the offensive line and that unit was already terrible last season) and added Jimmy Graham in a trade. There´s no reason to think the Packers are a better football team as of now.
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,555
Reaction score
665
That can't be the only reasoning on where to rank a team. There are several factors that contribute to us being ranked ahead of Seattle. We were the better team in the second half of last season. We beat the snot out of them for 55 minutes until an absolutely bizarre string of luck gave them a freak win. 9 times out of 10 we win that game. We've had a better offseason in the opinion of this writer, so there's plenty of reason to put us ahead of them at this point.

19-7 is a nice lead, but I think the point is that we SHOULD have beaten the snot out of them and been so far out in front that the last five minutes would have been a chuckle instead of the disaster. The only place I think you weren't positive enough is that I certainly hope we win that game more than 90% of the time.
 

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,721
Reaction score
1,997
19-7 is a nice lead, but I think the point is that we SHOULD have beaten the snot out of them and been so far out in front that the last five minutes would have been a chuckle instead of the disaster. The only place I think you weren't positive enough is that I certainly hope we win that game more than 90% of the time.
Really needed at least one or two more first half touchdowns in that game. All those red zone field goals kept Seattle in the game.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
"But the Pack needed a nickel". Since when.

Besides, Aaron Rodgers...err...I mean the Packers are always at the top of the preseason power rankings. It means nothing.
 
Top