Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by LuRkeR1978, May 10, 2006.
Yahoo! Power Rankings
Gotta love Yahoo! Sports....
Jets at 14? Chargers rated ahead of the Patriots? Cmon..............Be for real.
Umm, Eric Who?
Yahoo says the Chargers will struggle to make the playoffs if Rivers falters. Wouldn't you think that a team that they ranked 5th shouldn't have a major question mark at the team's most important position?
A shadow of the Super Bowl Units?
Ever think the defensive woes early last year had to do with, say, injuries?
XXXIX starting defensive lineup:
LE - Ty Warren
NT - Keith Traylor/Vince Wilfork
RE - Richard Seymour
LOLB - Willie McGinest
ILB - Tedy Bruschi
ILB - Roman Phifer
ROLB - Mike Vrabel
CB - Asante Samuel
CB - Randall Gay
FS - Eugene Wilson
SS - Rodney Harrison
Now the probable (assuming Rodney stays on-schedule) 2006 lineup:
LE - Ty Warren (no change)
NT - Vince Wilfork (better Wilfork than in 2004, but with less depth behind him)
RE - Richard Seymour (no change)
LOLB - Rosevelt Colvin (10x better than 2004 self, now back as a prominent starter)
ILB - Tedy Bruschi (no change)
ILB - Monty Beisel (same 4th LB mix as in 2004)
ROLB - Mike Vrabel (no change)
CB - Asante Samuel (no change)
CB - Ellis Hobbs (with XXXIX starter Gay as nickelback)
FS - Eugene Wilson (no change)
SS - Rodney Harrison (no change)
In terms of depth, there's more experience at DE than in 2004, less experience at NT than in 2004, less experience and overall less depth than in 2004, but incredibly more depth at DB than in 2004.
The loss of Mangini makes the Patriots defense better. Pees
has been a defensive coordinator most of his career. Why do
you think Belichick encouraged Eric to take the Jets job?
BB did not encourage EM from what I understand, he actually told him he wasn't ready for head coaching position and particularly not the jets because of the cap situation they're in.
I heard he told him it was a great opportunity and he should do it.
Obviously, because we lost a 34 year old linebacker and they only lost a Pro Bowl quarterback ... umm, wait a minute ...
Give me a break....
Steelers arent the best by any means. Yes they are the champs, but next season hell I dont even see them in the playoffs.
Mangini was DC for one year, so, ah, yeah, losing an inexperienced DC who DID NOT oversee a SB defense is really going to kill us.
Willie was a warrior and he will be missed, I agree, but he had to go someday - every player does...
Looking at the list of rankings it becomes apparent that there are an awful lot of really bad teams out there. Miami number 8? Wow...
The Colts are the team that was devastated - the D was already a weak link so losing Tripplett really hurts. But an argument could be made that the Colts lost the single best player they've had in the last twenty years. Peyton had the numbers but it was often the grinding and banging by James that kept the momentum for the Colts AND kept their mediocre D off the field.
Cincy ahead of us? yeah, that makes sense since their D still stinks and their superstar QB looks to be out until mid-season.
The Chargers? You've got to be kidding me! They have a decent D but lost the cog, Brees, that along with LT carried them in rough times. So, Rivers is expected to step in and overcome the insanely bad coaching of MartyBall that even a vet like Brees couldn't do? Hmmmmm
What about injuries??? Totally overlooked..ridiculous!!! I agree the depth if injury free could be an incredible plus...and that is without any additions that MAY take place in the next months!!
Regardless they are still the champs and deserve the be ranked as such. People bring up a good point about why teams like the Chargers, Broncos, and Bengals all have serious QB questions but are still ranked ahead the Pats who have the best QB in the league. In addition I think last years defense was the worst we will see under BB, and that was because of events out of his control like the Bruschi stroke, sudden Johnson retirement, and Rodney's injury. This year the Pats CHOSE to let Willie go, and made no effort to bring him back, which shows they are confident about their personnel, or know they will be able to make the necessary moves to fill the holes. And if BB is confident in a defense, chances are it's going to be pretty damn good.
Thanks for this post. I was wondering this when I first started to think of "what is really different" in our lineups. I would say offensively we are vastly improved with the only question mark being #2 receiver (which I personally dont think will be a problem and will be filled in with jackson/caldwell). I guess the one overlooked from the starting lineup would be Ted Johnson, but the "glaring weakness of ILB" isnt really much changed since XXXIX. I LOVE Willie, but if I had to take him or Rosie at this poing in their careers I would take Rosie.
This was comical...
How does a team with a "monumental loss", a "stinging" loss, that's likely to be at a strategic disadvantage from the loss of James, and that had a "non-impact" draft, get to be ranked 4th???
Charles Robinson is a toolbox. That's how.
"Are you kidding?" said Roethlisberger shaking his head. "I'm just going to enjoy the first one before I think about the next one."
uhhh....Ben? Maybe you should have just said "No comment"? Since you DIDN'T do anything to contribute to the SB "win" (and we ALL know how that atrocity of a SB was "won")........why don't you just shut your yap and be thankful that the refs gave it to you and the seahawks shot themselves in the foot enough for you to win "Stink bowl 40".......what a jacka## this guy is........
2002 was worse, and there were no excuses.
But the Steelers were 6-10 a couple years ago. we had a bad year in 2002.
Yes 2002 was the worst, which I forgot, probably because I think of the 2003 season when the Patirots defense really became what we know it as, as sort of the coming out of Belichick. I kind of consider the previous years pre-BB which is pretty silly because we won the SB on '01, but that D was a lot of overachieving nobodys united by great gameplan. It wasn't the dominating force it was in '03 and '04. There is a good chance what I just wrote only made sense in my own mind, but oh well.....
2001 was the perfect example of a team beating a collection of talented players. No one could reasonably show that the Patriots were more talented than the Rams. But they were a better team. Doesn't make sense, but I think of it every time someone says we would be better if we had Ray Lewis or TO or any of a number players who do not subordinate themselves to the concept of team. A good team is synergistic, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
I lone this. The dynasty is over as per the pundits,experts. Good I love it when the Pats are discounted. They thrive on being underestimated.
Barring another crazy injury year this team has to potential to be as good as or better than any of the BB teams.
Separate names with a comma.