ESPN: "Future" Power Rankings

[kungfoodude]

11 minutes ago, CRA said:

Nothing wrong w/ be excited about the potential.  But Nabors and Tmac ain't going to fair the same in a head to head ranking like this. 

and we have so bad, I just don't see the point of being offended we are last.  We deserve to be defaulted worse when it is close based on our proven track record of late. 

I had people losing their minds about me calling the 2024 roster the worst in franchise history and a very clear last place in the NFL prior to Game 1 last year.

I get being optimistic but we have to also be realistic. Are there arguments for us to be above #32? Yes, although I disagree. But to say we are anything outside the bottom 2 or 3 is bananas. 

 

[Greatman77]

No mention of the fact that we now have two, 1000 yard RBs from last season?

[kungfoodude]

2 minutes ago, Greatman77 said:

No mention of the fact that we now have two, 1000 yard RBs from last season?

Eh....I would say that is less likely to factor in to a "future" power ranking because RB's have very short lifespans and aren't rarely considered long term roster pieces in the modern era(TBD if this is changing).

[mrcompletely11]

15 minutes ago, Greatman77 said:

No mention of the fact that we now have two, 1000 yard RBs from last season?

in a world where there are now 17 games, thats not an impressive stat.  Like at all.  Thats roughly 50ish yards a game.

[Greatman77]

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

in a world where there are now 17 games, thats not an impressive stat.  Like at all.  Thats roughly 50ish yards a game.

Fair point, but I wonder how many other teams have 1000 yard duos...

[mrcompletely11]

4 minutes ago, Greatman77 said:

Fair point, but I wonder how many other teams have 1000 yard duos...

I bet more then you think

 

[CRA]

13 minutes ago, Greatman77 said:

No mention of the fact that we now have two, 1000 yard RBs from last season?

but to an extent, it's the whole Double Trouble aspect that sounds better than it sometimes actually is.  Having 2 featured RBs back in the day wasn't really a formula to be good.   It's great insurance.   But you can only play one of them.   So your ceiling at RB is really just how good is your best RB to a degree.  It's like having a great backup QB.  It doesn't carry that much weight.  Just means if things get bad, you don't drop off as much. 

 

[t96]

Our offensive line is all proven and it’s easily top 10 in the league. 2 legit RBs, wide receiver depth with upside and a recent top 10 pick as WR1. I don’t think it’s controversial to say that overall our offense outside of QB is top half of the league. D drags down the roster of course, but I think it drags the team down into the low-ish 20s, not worst in the league. At the end of the day it’s purely subjective so there’s really not much point in arguing back and forth. Well see how the season turns out soon enough

Edited August 11 by t96

[Icege]

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I bet more then you think

 

According to the numbers you would lose that bet because it's just one.

https://www.nfl.com/stats/player-stats/category/rushing/2024/reg/all/rushingyards/desc

[Greatman77]

4 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I bet more then you think

 

According to Grok: 

In the 2024 NFL season, only one team had two running backs who each rushed for at least 1,000 yards: the Detroit Lions, with Jahmyr Gibbs (1,412 yards) and David Montgomery (1,077 yards). 

No idea if this is true or an AI hallucination.

[CRA]

2 minutes ago, t96 said:

Our offensive line is all proven and it’s easily top 10 in the league. 2 legit RBs, wide receiver depth with upside and a recent top 10 pick as WR1. I don’t think it’s controversial to say that overall our offense outside of QB is top half of the league. D drags down the roster of course, but I think it drags the team down into the low-ish 20s, not worst in the league. At the end of the day it’s purely subjective so there’s really not much point in arguing back and forth. Well see how the season turns out soon enough

Top half of the league?  We had the 29th ranked offense in the NFL last year and that was with the highest paid OL 

[UnluckyforSome]

2 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

I also noted that we have their panels 32nd ranked roster, which I also agree with.

Hence why I get a little perplexed by the minority opinions here talking playoffs. I do understand how weak our division is and favorable the schedule is but.....we will rarely not be the least talented team on the field, if ever.

A lot of that I think is the hope of talking it into existence. Barring a collapse from Tampa, we aren't in for a break-thru year. Maybe the offense will be a notch better, or more consistent, but it better be capable of averaging 30+ points a game, because I have a sinking feeling that the defense sure will.

[kungfoodude]

4 minutes ago, t96 said:

Our offensive line is all proven and it’s easily top 10 in the league. 2 legit RBs, wide receiver depth with upside and a recent top 10 pick as WR1. I don’t think it’s controversial to say that overall our offense outside of QB is top half of the league. D drags down the roster of course, but I think it drags the team down into the low-ish 20s, not worst in the league. At the end of the day it’s purely subjective so there’s really not much point in arguing back and forth. Well see how the season turns out soon enough

I would push back on that to an extent. Icky has yet to be top 10 and Corbett is really closer to bottom 10 than top 10 at his position. The guards are quite good and Moton can be significantly above average.

It's a very good unit but it does have some warts. Certainly depth being one, although that is the best it has been for us in quite some time.

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, Icege said:

According to the numbers you would lose that bet because it's just one.

https://www.nfl.com/stats/player-stats/category/rushing/2024/reg/all/rushingyards/desc

Lions

Texans

Bucs

Cowboys, kc and skins are within 100 yards of having 2

I quit counting there

 

so yeah its not some rarefied feat