21Knock_U_Out Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 Come on people , he is ranking the teams for their OFFSEASON ACQUISITIONS.............................:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindred Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 Come on people , he is ranking the teams for their OFFSEASON ACQUISITIONS.............................:doh: and taking into account losses. We werent ranked that high because of the perception that we didnt address our D line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RideorDieChic Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6817568?MSNHPHCP>1=10035I'd say that this is a fair assessment. Wow, Chicago at 27??? Granted, they have lost some ground but 27 out of 32 is a bit low for the former SB contenders... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jr41911 Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 Chicago was low because they aquired AA & didn't fix the Grossman problem. The Bills at 14? They lost alot of good players. Our assessment was good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RideorDieChic Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 Talk about going from sugar to stink in no time, one year AA is the highest paid safety in the league, the very next year his acquisition is a major factor for dropping a teams stocks to the bottom of the barrel.... Amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XtremeRedskins83 Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 I like this assessment. Fletcher should definately be a force in the middle allowing Marshall to move back to the outside where he was a much better LB. Splitting time with McCintosh will help the weakside. I know we didn't fix our d-line problem but we should have better coverage with the addition of Landry and Smoot so I would think QBs will be holding the ball longer, allowing our line to get in for more sacks and more pressure. All in all, I like whats been done this offseason, plus we have all our picks for next years draft which a nice change of pace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juniorbandit Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 This is one of the most ridiculous offseason rankings I've seen. The Chargers, Bears, and Ravens shouldn't be that low. I like where the Giants are though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isle-hawg Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 I don't get how according to them we did everything right and we are still ranked #22.That's some bull****! It may have something to do with our lack of draft picks in rounds 2 -4 :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theTruthTeller Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 This is one of the most ridiculous offseason rankings I've seen. The Chargers, Bears, and Ravens shouldn't be that low. I like where the Giants are though. Others have tried and failed at explaining the rankings - let me try. This is NOT a ranking of how the author thinks the 32 teams will end up the season. It is only a ranking of the acquisitions and losses that a team incurred during the offseason. Thus, Indianapolis ranked low because they had losses greater than their gains. It is not an indication that Indy or Chicago will finish at the bottom this year. The Skins ranked low because they gained one top player but did not address their greatest weakness. Its not like this hasn't been addressed on ES a billion times since the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsfor4 Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 Betts knows his role on this team when CPs healthy!A better assesment of our D line would be unstable,but if healthy we will be fine.Offsseason rankings are shots in the dark and mean nothing.All teams start 0-0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindred Posted May 20, 2007 Share Posted May 20, 2007 the ignorance in this thread is high. :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom [Giants fan] Posted May 20, 2007 Share Posted May 20, 2007 Good, the Giants are usually at their best when the media believes they will be at their worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petey_Crack Posted May 20, 2007 Share Posted May 20, 2007 ']Good' date=' the Giants are usually at their best when the media believes they will be at their worst.[/quote']especially eli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel2 Posted May 20, 2007 Share Posted May 20, 2007 Biggest loss: Derrick Dockery! Give me a feakin break! I'm glad he's gone and I don't think we will miss him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.