Redskins #14 in ESPN Offseason Power Rankings

chrisl4064 · 05-13-2008, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Or you can look at it this way. Clev added two solid d-tackles, D. Stallworth and Anderson has a full off season and training camp as the unquestioned starter. Add all that to Blaylon Edwards, Kellen Winslow Joe J., Jamal Lewis and you've got a pretty impressive set of skills guys. We'll see what happens but I like Cleveland over Balt, Pitts and Cinn.

Well i guess we will see, Clevelands road is not easy at all. Their first two games are Dallas and Pittsburgh.

GTripp0012 · 05-13-2008, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Or you can look at it this way. Clev added two solid d-tackles, D. Stallworth and Anderson has a full off season and training camp as the unquestioned starter. Add all that to Blaylon Edwards, Kellen Winslow Joe J., Jamal Lewis and you've got a pretty impressive set of skills guys. We'll see what happens but I like Cleveland over Balt, Pitts and Cinn.

But with the schedule they are playing, if their defense (hypotetically) jumps into the top ten in the NFL, they are still only an 8-8 team. And that's a lot to ask from the 30th ranked defense last year.

I'm not writing off those defensive acquisitions here, but they also traded their best cover corner, maybe the best cover corner in that division (Bodden), to Detroit in the Rogers deal and they will be replacing him with the great...Gary Baxter. They are really going to be asking a lot from that front seven to improve 4 "wins"** worth just to keep them competitive in a tough division.

**My argument here is that last year's Browns roster playing this year's Browns' schedule would win 6-7 games. I have numbers to back up this theory, but for simplicity's sake, I'm just posting it as an opinion.

I will give you that Pittsburgh and Cincinnati are playing the same difficult schedule that Cleveland is, that much is certain, however I feel that those teams are far more prepared to play those tough opponents than the young Browns are AND they are just probably better teams overall. I don't think Cleveland is going to be relevant come December--unless a bunch of guys have career years.

prinzeofmoval · 05-13-2008, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

#14 isn't too bad, I thought they would place them much lower because Zorn is such an unknown at this point.

I rather be out of the national spotlight anyway. Whenever the media had low expectations for us we rocked and surprised teams we normally wouldn't have. Yet when they expect us to win the division we don't measure up. I like where we sit. i think its not high enough where i would like but respectful enough not to go 20th and down because of our rich history.

Daseal · 05-13-2008, 09:50 AM

The redskins do have tons of questions, generous ranking.

Stuck in TX · 05-13-2008, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djnemo65

How can that still be? This year remember we decided to resume participation in the NFL's annual draft??

We need about five more years to catch up with everyone else.

Mattyk72 · 05-13-2008, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djnemo65

How can that still be? This year remember we decided to resume participation in the NFL's annual draft??

I think guys like Collins, Albright, and Daniels and throwing off the curve.

irish · 05-14-2008, 10:39 AM

This is a middle of the pack team so the power ranking fits.

skinsfan69 · 05-14-2008, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

But with the schedule they are playing, if their defense (hypotetically) jumps into the top ten in the NFL, they are still only an 8-8 team. And that's a lot to ask from the 30th ranked defense last year.

I'm not writing off those defensive acquisitions here, but they also traded their best cover corner, maybe the best cover corner in that division (Bodden), to Detroit in the Rogers deal and they will be replacing him with the great...Gary Baxter. They are really going to be asking a lot from that front seven to improve 4 "wins"** worth just to keep them competitive in a tough division.

**My argument here is that last year's Browns roster playing this year's Browns' schedule would win 6-7 games. I have numbers to back up this theory, but for simplicity's sake, I'm just posting it as an opinion.

I will give you that Pittsburgh and Cincinnati are playing the same difficult schedule that Cleveland is, that much is certain, however I feel that those teams are far more prepared to play those tough opponents than the young Browns are AND they are just probably better teams overall. I don't think Cleveland is going to be relevant come December--unless a bunch of guys have career years.

The schedules really don't mean anything cause we are going off teams records/performances from last year. But there is no way you can put Cinn over Clev. Clev had a better record last year and they had a better off season.

GTripp0012 · 05-14-2008, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

The schedules really don't mean anything cause we are going off teams records/performances from last year. But there is no way you can put Cinn over Clev. Clev had a better record last year and they had a better off season.

Cincinnati's offense looks a lot better. A lot. I mean, who is going to take Derek Anderson's ability over Carson Palmer's? Moreover, I'd bet more heavily on a good season from Rudi Johnson than I would from Jamal Lewis. If Passing+Running=Offense, and I don't see how it doesn't, Cincinnati seems like the better offense in 2008.

And last year, their defense was actually better than Cleveland's (and was the worst it had been in the Lewis era). I'm not saying that will be the case again, just that the offense will be better.

I also dont get why we can't go off teams records from last season, but then I can't put Cinci over Cleveland in part because Cleveland had a better record last year?

Cleveland had a poor off-season. It's possible that adding Shaun Rogers and Corey Williams helped them, but Rogers is a chronic underachiever and I don't think it offset the loss of their top CB. I expect their D to improve over last year, but they are going to get blown out (lose by 10+ points) in at least seven games this year. They may do well in close games, and should beat the Ravens twice, but I still don't like them for any more than 6-7 wins.

05-13-2008, 09:50 AM	#34 (permalink)
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Fairfax, Virginia Posts: 6,674	Re: Redskins #14 in ESPN Offseason Power Rankings The redskins do have tons of questions, generous ranking. __________________ Apparently not having unrelenting optimism means you're not a fan.

05-14-2008, 10:39 AM	#37 (permalink)
irish The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,815	Re: Redskins #14 in ESPN Offseason Power Rankings This is a middle of the pack team so the power ranking fits.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Redskins #14 in ESPN Offseason Power Rankings

Redskins Locker Room