Brandt: Over-hyped teams to do well in 2006

[drpatriot]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9532593

A few other interesting picks are also shown.

We took into consideration each team's performance from last season, who they lost and who they gained.
1. Carolina
2. Indianapolis
6. Dallas
9. Miami
17. Arizona
18. San Diego

Yes, Dallas is above 7 playoff teams. Yes, Arizona is above San Diego. Honestly, I'm surprised at Brandt, who is usually intelligent about his picks instead of just making the "sexy" picks.

 

[pats1]

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=37446

 

[drpatriot]

Crap...I hate it when I do that. Ah well.

Edit: The other thread looks to me like a Dolphins vs. Pats thread far too much for my tastes, and I am interested in what people think about other ratings.

 

[pats-blue]

Two things stuck out to me.....first the love fest with the Colts.

"Also last season, the Colts offense was No. 3 in rushing. Losing Edgerrin James was big, but remember that Dominic Rhodes rushed for 1,000-plus yards (as an undrafted rookie) in the season James missed with a knee injury."

What exactly is the Colts record if James doesn't start? Oh thats right...

Since 1999, the Colts are 77-35 -- 70-26 when he plays, 7-9 when he doesn't

Second maybe I'm reading it wrong but his statement about the Pats injuries sounds like he is saying they DIDN'T have many...

"and ranked near the bottom with games missed by injury."

Piss poor reporting and revisionist history if you ask me.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Two things stuck out to me.....first the love fest with the Colts.

"Also last season, the Colts offense was No. 3 in rushing. Losing Edgerrin James was big, but remember that Dominic Rhodes rushed for 1,000-plus yards (as an undrafted rookie) in the season James missed with a knee injury."

What exactly is the Colts record if James doesn't start? Oh thats right...

Since 1999, the Colts are 77-35 -- 70-26 when he plays, 7-9 when he doesn't

Second maybe I'm reading it wrong but his statement about the Pats injuries sounds like he is saying they DIDN'T have many...

"and ranked near the bottom with games missed by injury."

Piss poor reporting and revisionist history if you ask me.

Not to mention how Vinatieri is a "huge" acquisition, but so is the acquisition of Vanderjagt by the Cowboys.

You ask me, replacing Adam isn't the big question mark, it's the effect of weakness at the LB position. For pure skills, Ghost replaces Adam fine. But WillieMac, even if he is probably ready to hit the downslope, might be less replaceable. It's probably a good move, given his age and his demands. But that doesn't mean we're not, quite possibly, going to be hurting at LB. Nature of the beast... now, we might make a lot of noise going forward with what we've got, but it's definitely a position of concern. What does Brandt notice? The "skill positions." The "Fantasy" positions.

Eh well. That's why they play the games.

PFnV

 

[patsfan13]

It's interesting that when looking at stastical ranking, the impact of injuries to the OL and DB's is totally ignored by the analyst are totally ignored. The Patriots D inthe playoff's is an entirly different unit that the post Rodney pass D. The OL with Koppen & Light back is very different than the unit that started 2 rookies last year (and we can resonably expect the rookies performance to jump up this year with their experience).

 

[primetime]

"The Patriots were the only team to make the playoffs in 2005 with more turnovers (18) than takeaways (24)."

I'm pretty sure 18 is less than 24 though?

 

[patsfan13]

I think the numbers were reversed, 24 giveaways and 18 takeaways. This was due in large part to the lack of INT's over the first 11 games.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Crap...I hate it when I do that. Ah well.

Edit: The other thread looks to me like a Dolphins vs. Pats thread far too much for my tastes, and I am interested in what people think about other ratings.

Don't sweat it - well-named threads tend to do better and attract more attention, and feedback.

We can handle a few duplicates here and there - especially when most may have missed seeing or missed the point of the original thread

 

[Pats726]

Second maybe I'm reading it wrong but his statement about the Pats injuries sounds like he is saying they DIDN'T have many...

"and ranked near the bottom with games missed by injury."

Piss poor reporting and revisionist history if you ask me.

Near the bottom??? I agree Brandt is totally WRONG on that count...the 05 Pats were totally decimated by injuries...I agree it sounds like someone totally fumbled the ball on that one..and to be that blatant..I wonder what other MISTAKES of note were in the report. SHoddy at best.

 

[patsox23]

I think he meant "near the bottom" to be that we lost a lot of players.

One thing I don't get from that article - How signing Adam is "BIG" for the Colts. This is a team that trounces its opponents. If he hits some "big" FGs, how many more wins will that bring?

 

[Kdo5]

This AV thing is so overblown its ridiculous. Adam is a great clutch performer. But this Gostwoski was the best K avalible in the draft. Its not like we will never be able to kick another field goal again without Vinatraitor. SG already showed possible signs of clutch when he booted a 40 yarder through so that the players didnt have to run for the rest of the day.

 

[zippo59]

Two things stuck out to me.....first the love fest with the Colts.

"Also last season, the Colts offense was No. 3 in rushing. Losing Edgerrin James was big, but remember that Dominic Rhodes rushed for 1,000-plus yards (as an undrafted rookie) in the season James missed with a knee injury."

What exactly is the Colts record if James doesn't start? Oh thats right...

Since 1999, the Colts are 77-35 -- 70-26 when he plays, 7-9 when he doesn't

What stuck out to me the most is the lovefest for the Panthers. He ranked them number 1, but as I have expressed in past posts I think they are kinda chokers. They went to the SB and played well, but couldn't make the plays when they needed to. In 2004 they were killed by injuries but still had a chance to get a wilcard in the terrible NFC if they just beat the Saints in week 17. They play a terrible game and lose. Then last year they had some injuries but looked to have survived them, and with no team clearly separating itself in the NFC it looks to be a prime opportunity for them. First they demolish the Giants then the Bears in the playoffs, both games on the road. Everything looks set for them to walk away with the NFC, then they lay an egg and get embarrassed in the title game. I see a team that is good, but not good enough to get it done when push comes to shove. I am always perplexed by the accolades they recieve.

 

[Aqua4Ever04]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9532593

A few other interesting picks are also shown.



Yes, Dallas is above 7 playoff teams. Yes, Arizona is above San Diego. Honestly, I'm surprised at Brandt, who is usually intelligent about his picks instead of just making the "sexy" picks.

How do you call Carolina an overhyped team? They were in the NFC championship last year and IMO the best team in the NFC. They have improved this off-season and will be representing the NFC in the Super Bowl in Miami IMO. Also, I don't really think the Fins are over hyped. Despite all the moves and improvements, not many people, other than Fin fans, are giving Miami a chance to win the AFC East.

 

[zippo59]

How do you call Carolina an overhyped team? They were in the NFC championship last year and IMO the best team in the NFC. They have improved this off-season and will be representing the NFC in the Super Bowl in Miami IMO. Also, I don't really think the Fins are over hyped. Despite all the moves and improvements, not many people, other than Fin fans, are giving Miami a chance to win the AFC East.

You saying they were the best team in the NFC despite losing badly in the title game only furthers my point.

By the way, I'm not sure if your post was directed at me but regardless, it applies to what I was saying.

 

[Aqua4Ever04]

Two things stuck out to me.....first the love fest with the Colts.

"Also last season, the Colts offense was No. 3 in rushing. Losing Edgerrin James was big, but remember that Dominic Rhodes rushed for 1,000-plus yards (as an undrafted rookie) in the season James missed with a knee injury."

What exactly is the Colts record if James doesn't start? Oh thats right...

Since 1999, the Colts are 77-35 -- 70-26 when he plays, 7-9 when he doesn't

I really agree. I for one believe the Colts will suffer greatly with the loss of Edgerin James. I really believe they will struggle to win the division away from Jacksonville and I actully have the Jags winning that South division.

 

[texpat]

It's interesting that when looking at stastical ranking, the impact of injuries to the OL and DB's is totally ignored by the analyst are totally ignored. The Patriots D inthe playoff's is an entirly different unit that the post Rodney pass D. The OL with Koppen & Light back is very different than the unit that started 2 rookies last year (and we can resonably expect the rookies performance to jump up this year with their experience).

The OL being "very different" doesn't guarantee an improvement. Ever hear of a "Sophomore jinx"? I am very worried about the OL. What if players don't get over their injuries and there are additional injury problems? Who do we have that can step up????

 

[drpatriot]

The OL being "very different" doesn't guarantee an improvement. Ever hear of a "Sophomore jinx"? I am very worried about the OL. What if players don't get over their injuries and there are additional injury problems? Who do we have that can step up????

Ryan O'Callaghan and Wes Britt both look promising.

Russ Hochstein did well last year as a sub. One of Nick Kaczur or Brandon Gorin will be able to fill in if neccessary, whoever isn't starting at RT.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

It was the typical June/July article, lots of speculation with very little evidence. The thing that jumped off the screen for me is where he ranked the Pats - can't let them slide out of the top five.

 

[Aqua4Ever04]

You saying they were the best team in the NFC despite losing badly in the title game only furthers my point.

By the way, I'm not sure if your post was directed at me but regardless, it applies to what I was saying.

It was directed at the title being "overhyped teams." I just strongly disagree that Carolina is over hyped. Miami isn't really over hyped either. Both are good teams who could make serious runs this year.