Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: Rams are "bottom feeders"

  1. #1
    MauiRam's Avatar
    MauiRam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Maui, Hi.
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,795
    Rep Power
    79

    Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Preseason Power Rankings:

    By Gregg Rosenthal
    Around The League editor
    Published: July 25, 2012

    An annual reminder: The actual NFL season will be 500 times crazier than any preseason predictions. That's why we keep coming back. Keep that in mind while checking out Around the League's first power rankings. This isn't a ranking of how teams finished last season; it's how they look for 2012.

    Around the League will do our own set of power rankings this year, but they will look a little different. Instead of straight rankings, we'll group teams by tier. Because tiers clearly are less arbitrary.

    Top Shelf: Green Bay Packers, New England Patriots, Pittsburgh Steelers and Baltimore Ravens

    Half of the NFL's playoff population every season doesn't make it back. And yet we'll be stunned if any team out of this quartet doesn't make it to the tournament. Pittsburgh and Baltimore are stuck together with a dangerous Cincinnati Bengals team in the AFC North, so we shouldn't be that stunned. Green Bay and New England have the best quarterbacks in football along with young defenses that should improve.

    Next level: Houston Texans, Philadelphia Eagles, New York Giants, New Orleans Saints and Kansas City Chiefs

    It wouldn't be a surprise to see any of these teams in New Orleans this February. The Texans' young defense is scary; their roster doesn't have many holes. Philadelphia enjoyed a great offseason simply by retaining its best players. The Giants are deeper than ever; they just need Eli Manning's big jump in 2011 to stick. New Orleans has questions all over its defense, but Drew Brees covers up a lot of problems. We expect a big step up for a youthful, talented Chiefs squad.

    Anything less than the playoffs for these teams should be viewed as a disappointment.

    Contenders: San Francisco *****, Atlanta Falcons, New York Jets, Detroit Lions, Chicago Bears, Dallas Cowboys, Cincinnati Bengals, Carolina Panthers and Seattle Seahawks

    We tried to whittle this tier down, but it didn't make sense in August. Teams are more alike than different in the NFL, especially before the season starts.

    ***** fans will not be happy but we expect some regression to the mean after a dream season. We're not convinced their passing game will maintain.

    The rest of this tier could be elite if everything falls right, but the teams have enough holes possibly to struggle with reaching .500. There are few things about the Jets' offense that to like. The same goes for Detroit's back seven on defense. The quarterbacks get the blame in Chicago and Dallas, but Tony Romo and Jay Cutler are good enough to win titles if the rest of the team steps up. The Bengals must show they can beat quality competition. Atlanta has to be better than steady in a brutal division. If you could combine the Panthers' offense with the Seahawks' defense, you'd have a top-five team.

    Not sold: Buffalo Bills, Denver Broncos, San Diego Chargers and Tennessee Titans

    Buffalo's offseason hype is worrisome. We love Chan Gailey, but it's hard to expect him to out-scheme the opposition all season. In Denver, there is a lot of assuming Peyton Manning will be Peyton Manning and that their weaknesses suddenly will disappear. The Titans could make noise in a weak division. After years of overrating the Chargers, we're hoping to underrate them.

    Searching for mediocrity: Arizona Cardinals, Oakland Raiders, Washington Redskins and Miami Dolphins

    Eight to nine wins from teams in this group are within reach, but they have an uphill climb. Arizona's improving defense might only be the third best in the NFC West. Oakland's defense will be in a year of transition. Washington and Miami have enough talent to hope for modest improvement. Playoff contention from anyone in this group should be considered a positive.

    Bottom feeders: Jacksonville Jaguars, Minnesota Vikings, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Cleveland Browns, St. Louis Rams and Indianapolis Colts

    These teams are hoping for a miracle. Jacksonville at least has the pieces for a solid defense. Leslie Frazier's Vikings seem to be taking a step back before they can move forward. We worry about the coaching support around new Bucs head coach Greg Schiano. The Browns are stuck in the wrong division for rookie quarterback Brandon Weeden. The Colts have more depth chart holes than any team in the NFL.

    If any of these teams make the playoffs, we'd have a strong Coach of the Year candidate.

    Although the title of this thread is somewhat inflammatory, we've more or less earned the moniker the last few years. That said, this year could end differently, given the infusion of new players joining the team along with a brand new coaching staff and GM. Certainly a lot of unknowns at this point .. Jeff Fisher for "Coach of the Year" anyone?


  2. #2
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,491
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Another yawn.

    I laughed at the notion that Seattle, Carolina and the Jets are "contenders," though, so at least the article is good for a chuckle.

  3. #3
    RuffRams's Avatar
    RuffRams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Earth
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,179
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    In my eyes the Broncos/Chargers have a way better chance than Seattle, Carolina or NYJ. This whole rankings isn't that good period.


  4. #4
    laram0's Avatar
    laram0 is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    57
    Posts
    9,153
    Rep Power
    107

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    There are always top tier teams that falter and there are always bottom feeders that surprise. This is another in a long list of blah blah blah articles.....

  5. #5
    rNemesis's Avatar
    rNemesis is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Nassau
    Age
    29
    Posts
    748
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Who is Gregg Rosenthal??

    No seriously, who is this guy? I notice that a lot of his articles have major inconsistencies and untruths. The idiot didnt even put a reason why the Rams are bottom -feeders, and also, IMHO, WE should be at least searching for mediocrity.

    What a clown

  6. #6
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    I'm surprised to see KC in the "next level". They're 27-51 over the last 5 years and were 7-9 last year. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I don't see how you can argue that a team that hasn't won a playoff game since 1993 should view anything less than the playoffs as a disappointment. Putting them in the same category as the Giants just doesn't seem right.

    Maybe I'm biased, but I also find the idea of Seattle as a contender laughable.

    He seems to have gotten lazy the further he got down the list. Basically, the bottom of his list is almost identical to the bottom of the standings in 2011. All of his bottom six were in the bottom six last year, and eight of ten in the bottom two categories are predicted to be exactly where their standings last year would have placed them. The one reassuring thing about this kind of list is that when you see a prediction that almost every team will finish within a couple wins of where they did last year, it's almost certain to be wrong.

  7. #7
    ram1906's Avatar
    ram1906 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ca
    Posts
    132
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Kansas City next level????????? Obviously someone without a true sense of reality

  8. #8
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,550
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Personally, I love it. Now, all these monkeys look stupid when the Rams actually do something this year.

    Bottom feeders? We'll see.
    THOLTFAN81 and Flippin' Ram like this.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  9. #9
    J-RodRamFan's Avatar
    J-RodRamFan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    DMV- Maryland
    Posts
    419
    Rep Power
    3

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    I'm glad I'm not the only one wondering why the Chiefs are ranked that high. And the article talks about pieces of Jacksonville's defense like we don't have any solid pieces.

  10. #10
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,897
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Another yawn.

    I laughed at the notion that Seattle, Carolina and the Jets are "contenders," though, so at least the article is good for a chuckle.
    But but but Cam Newton throws for 600 yards and 12 TDs a game, and runs for 5 more, and Tebow literally cannot be beaten, even if you put 10,000 defenders on the field! And Marshawn Lynch just needs to enter "beast mode" and the seachickens can't lose! How can these teams not be contenders!?

  11. #11
    mh-i's Avatar
    mh-i is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    CA
    Age
    55
    Posts
    1,169
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    I don't know about Gregg Rosenthal in particular but last year most of these guys got burned picking the Rams to win the division so most of them are obviously backing off this season coming off a 2-14 record.

  12. #12
    LA Rammer's Avatar
    LA Rammer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Wilmington, CA
    Age
    44
    Posts
    2,679
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Rams are "bottom feeders"-294621_10150428467395731_560347578_n.jpg

    Thats all I have to say about that
    laram0, ram1906 and RuffRams like this.
    LA RAMMER

    It's Jim not Chris
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HNgqQVHI_8

  13. #13
    BlueTalon's Avatar
    BlueTalon is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Washington
    Age
    53
    Posts
    213
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    It's all butt-lint at this point. Nobody knows anything for sure, and reporters & commentators are mostly just lazy. I think the NFCW will be one of the tougher divisions this year, and I believe the Rams will be part of that, but few of the east coast mediots are going to acknowledge it, even while it's happening. It will be an after-the-fact surprise, and maybe disregarded as an anomaly.


    Now,
    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    I laughed at the notion that Seattle, Carolina and the Jets are "contenders," though, so at least the article is good for a chuckle.
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenfleece View Post
    Maybe I'm biased, but I also find the idea of Seattle as a contender laughable.
    We'll see if you're still chuckling and laughing at the end of the season...

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Glenrothes, SCOTLAND
    Posts
    9,963
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Until the Rams go out there and prove they are NOT, then we need to sit here at take all the cheap shots, nuff said.
    RAMarkable and macrammer like this.


  15. #15
    macrammer's Avatar
    macrammer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Cal
    Age
    55
    Posts
    1,950
    Rep Power
    27

    Re: Rams are "bottom feeders"

    Quote Originally Posted by RamDez View Post
    Until the Rams go out there and prove they are NOT, then we need to sit here at take all the cheap shots, nuff said.
    We were one of the worst teams in football last year. IMO, we were the worst team. Nothing changes until the play on the field dictates it. I think the 'pundits" will have something different to say about us by week 3 or 4 but I do not care about them only how we look on the field and turning a tight game into W

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: -10-26-2011, 11:35 PM
  2. Av's Annual "Sleeper" and "10 Foot Pole" Lists
    By AvengerRam in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: -03-08-2009, 01:48 AM
  3. Chad "ocho-cinco" Johnson or Adam "Pac-man"Jones
    By ManofGod in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -11-23-2008, 02:17 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: -11-14-2005, 06:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •