If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   ESPN latest NFL power rankings are out, and number one isn't the Super Bowl champs   ( espn.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Super Bowl, record, Total QBR, National Football League, Washington Redskins, free agents, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, season  
•       •       •

1691 clicks; posted to Sports » on 06 Feb 2018 at 12:13 AM (23 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-02-05 08:52:58 PM  
Since it's ESPN I'd be more surprised if the Patriots weren't #1.
 
2018-02-05 08:55:55 PM  
"We need to see Wentz back healthy?"

Tom Brady isn't going to sleep with you, ESPN.
 
2018-02-05 10:04:28 PM  
I can't argue much with this list. I do think the Giants will be better next year. It's not like they don't have talent, I think they just gave up after having such a terrible start. A new coach will go a long way.

I think Green Bay is too high. Without A-Aron they really don't have much and who knows if he'll be 100% next year.
 
2018-02-05 10:20:41 PM  
In retrospect, here's the Week One Power Ranking from 2017.  Why, that looks like the Eagles at 15 and the team they beat in the NFC title game -- the Vikings -- at 17.  My point is that polls like these, done so far in advance of the beginning of the season are just so much guess work.  The only power ranking that counts will be determined at the end of the Super Bowl next year.
 
2018-02-05 10:47:42 PM  

cfreak: I do think the Giants will be better next year


The Giants will be top 15 for sure.  Better than Washington, anyway.
 
2018-02-06 12:23:24 AM  
Unless the Jets, Bills and Dolphins merge into one Super Team*, I'm pretty sure the Patriots are a lock to repeat as AFC Least champs yet again.

* And even then, I'd probably still bet on New England.
 
2018-02-06 12:28:26 AM  

cfreak: I can't argue much with this list. I do think the Giants will be better next year. It's not like they don't have talent, I think they just gave up after having such a terrible start. A new coach will go a long way.

I think Green Bay is too high. Without A-Aron they really don't have much and who knows if he'll be 100% next year.


He's already playing in Pro-AM golf tournaments.

He's 100% *now*

Next year is next year, yes. But the injury is already in the history books
 
2018-02-06 12:30:30 AM  
I mean, I don't expect the Bears to set the world on fire next season, but really? 31st? That's laughably low.

/the North should be competitive next year
 
2018-02-06 12:39:25 AM  

germ78: I mean, I don't expect the Bears to set the world on fire next season, but really? 31st? That's laughably low.

/the North should be competitive next year


Haven't looked at everyone else in the north, but the Lions look like a 5-11 team with that schedule. Now, a good offseason might help that, but they had a cake schedule last year in a division with a rookie/rebuild in CHI, MIN on a 3rd string QB/backup RB's and GB without Rodgers and couldn't even make it competitive. They'll beat the bad teams, get killed by good teams and there's a lot of good teams on next years schedule.
 
2018-02-06 12:52:40 AM  

Starkaryen: germ78: I mean, I don't expect the Bears to set the world on fire next season, but really? 31st? That's laughably low.

/the North should be competitive next year

Haven't looked at everyone else in the north, but the Lions look like a 5-11 team with that schedule. Now, a good offseason might help that, but they had a cake schedule last year in a division with a rookie/rebuild in CHI, MIN on a 3rd string QB/backup RB's and GB without Rodgers and couldn't even make it competitive. They'll beat the bad teams, get killed by good teams and there's a lot of good teams on next years schedule.


The Loins will win 6-10 games. They've kept Cooter, they have Stafford. The oline isn't worse, the offensive weapons aren't much different. They'll be competative

Green Bay with a healthy A-Rod will be in the mix.

Minne is in it too. That defense is studly...the question is the QB position and the oline.

The Burz? Welp. We'll see. I doubt they'll be 'Browns' bad. But I have yet to see what Tube-Sticky will do with a new coach and offense. i will refrain from judgement for now. But...honestly...the signs aren't too good.
 
2018-02-06 12:54:03 AM  
Yeah, the Bengals look to be in about the right place.  Keeping Marvin Lewis was basically saying, "yeah, we're gonna suck again next year, might as well not saddle our new coach with a 3-13 record his first year."

Wouldn't shock me if the Bengals take over the basement of the AFC North from the Browns.
 
2018-02-06 01:01:25 AM  
Eagles get their entire team back next year, and have two starting QBs on their roster so they're going to deal in the off-season so should have an even better team.  The have a coach with giant brass balls.  They figured out that the way to beat the Pats isn't to go into a prevent defense in the 4th quarter.

The Pats have lost their OC, DC, and their head coach is questionable.  Tom Brady is great, but what allows that team to compete as well as it does is him making 14 million a year instead of the 30 million a year he would otherwise command if he wasn't simply chasing championships and banging supermodels.   Other teams have to draft well.  The Pats have an additional Brady Bonus pool they can use to fill in gaps, but that has to come apart sometime.  Soon.
 
2018-02-06 01:22:57 AM  

cfreak: I can't argue much with this list.


Then allow me.

Patriots way too high - everyone knows that if you can hit Brady, you can beat him. Their D is not striking fear into the hearts of...well anyone. Maybe they'll draft well. And maybe Belichick will stop believing his press clippings. Not bad, not #1

Steelers (my team) way too high - Cowher gift wrapped a ring before he left, that roster could've won a Super Bowl wish Jeff Fisher calling plays and Andy Reid managing the clock. Those guys are mostly gone now. Tomlin is on his own and I'm not impressed.

Rams too low- Amazing what a young, fired up team can do when you get Jeff Fisher out of the way. Nobody is going to confuse Goff with Rodgers, but he did a damn fine Drew Brees impersonation this year. Solid at O-line and RB. top 10 D. I'd put them above the Steelers and damn close to the Pats.

Texans too low - If they can keep a few big names off the IR and on the field, this is Divisional Round team, maybe even Conference contenders. Not gonna win it, but not missing many pieces.

Browns way too low - Slowly but surely, they're building something resembling a football team. A lackluster 2018 schedule and I can see CLE bringing in 5 or 6 wins.

/ Bookmarking this sh*t,
// fine line between genius and insanity
/// let's see which side this falls on
 
2018-02-06 01:32:08 AM  
I dunno how they give Pats number one after losing their OC and DC in one fell swoop (and likely some of their other staff).

Nevermind losing the Super Bowl.
 
2018-02-06 01:42:49 AM  

jake_lex: Yeah, the Bengals look to be in about the right place.  Keeping Marvin Lewis was basically saying, "yeah, we're gonna suck again next year, might as well not saddle our new coach with a 3-13 record his first year."

Wouldn't shock me if the Bengals take over the basement of the AFC North from the Browns.


I gave up, and bought a Vikings jersey recently. 
Can't take any more of Marvin the Mediocre.
 
2018-02-06 01:59:15 AM  
Yeah, brought to you by the same "experts" who in 2016 who gave Lurie a C- grade, for hiring Pederson -- sixth place out of six coaching hires.

DOUG PEDERSON
ESPN's take: Pederson has spent only three years in the league as a coordinator, all under a head coach who is a dominant offensive voice. Maybe Pederson has the "emotional intelligence" that owner Jeffrey Lurie is looking for and that Chip Kelly allegedly lacked, and maybe not. But after Coughlin pulled out of the chase and McAdoo canceled his second interview, Lurie didn't have much to choose from and figured Pederson might bring a little Andy Reid football back to the Linc. It feels like a reach.
My take: Was Pederson the best candidate for the job, or the only candidate they could get? With no other team interested, it's still hard to believe Lurie fired Kelly with hiring Pederson in mind. Maybe they will hit the lottery with Pederson, but it feels like a gamble the team was forced to take after beeing shot down by their top choices.
My grade: C-


Bonus: The guy they picked as the best hire in that class has won only one game in two seasons.
Double Bonus: Chip Kelly was number two.
 
2018-02-06 02:09:00 AM  

LessO2: Yeah, brought to you by the same "experts" who in 2016 who gave Lurie a C- grade, for hiring Pederson -- sixth place out of six coaching hires.

DOUG PEDERSON
ESPN's take: Pederson has spent only three years in the league as a coordinator, all under a head coach who is a dominant offensive voice. Maybe Pederson has the "emotional intelligence" that owner Jeffrey Lurie is looking for and that Chip Kelly allegedly lacked, and maybe not. But after Coughlin pulled out of the chase and McAdoo canceled his second interview, Lurie didn't have much to choose from and figured Pederson might bring a little Andy Reid football back to the Linc. It feels like a reach.
My take: Was Pederson the best candidate for the job, or the only candidate they could get? With no other team interested, it's still hard to believe Lurie fired Kelly with hiring Pederson in mind. Maybe they will hit the lottery with Pederson, but it feels like a gamble the team was forced to take after beeing shot down by their top choices.
My grade: C-


Bonus: The guy they picked as the best hire in that class has won only one game in two seasons.
Double Bonus: Chip Kelly was number two.


To be fair, that was a pretty popular opinion.  Doug has just proven them wrong.
 
2018-02-06 02:25:01 AM  

LessO2: Yeah, brought to you by the same "experts" who in 2016 who gave Lurie a C- grade, for hiring Pederson -- sixth place out of six coaching hires.


"Expert" has no meaning, particularly in sports. Since Teddy Atlas got pulled,  I don't think ESPN has many folks on the (rapidly diminishing) payroll who have any more expertise than that octopus who picks World Cup winners.

/ and those still employed there have to be beyond dizzy from circling the drain at a pace that makes Uber look like a sensible long term investment
 
2018-02-06 02:56:39 AM  

Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: LessO2: Yeah, brought to you by the same "experts" who in 2016 who gave Lurie a C- grade, for hiring Pederson -- sixth place out of six coaching hires.

DOUG PEDERSON
ESPN's take: Pederson has spent only three years in the league as a coordinator, all under a head coach who is a dominant offensive voice. Maybe Pederson has the "emotional intelligence" that owner Jeffrey Lurie is looking for and that Chip Kelly allegedly lacked, and maybe not. But after Coughlin pulled out of the chase and McAdoo canceled his second interview, Lurie didn't have much to choose from and figured Pederson might bring a little Andy Reid football back to the Linc. It feels like a reach.
My take: Was Pederson the best candidate for the job, or the only candidate they could get? With no other team interested, it's still hard to believe Lurie fired Kelly with hiring Pederson in mind. Maybe they will hit the lottery with Pederson, but it feels like a gamble the team was forced to take after beeing shot down by their top choices.
My grade: C-


Bonus: The guy they picked as the best hire in that class has won only one game in two seasons.
Double Bonus: Chip Kelly was number two.

To be fair, that was a pretty popular opinion.  Doug has just proven them wrong.


I get your point and agree to an extent.  However, since it was considered much worse than two coaching hires that ended up having a combined 3-45 record (two genuine "polish the turd" moves), saying the comments didn't age well may be a little more appropriate.  But not my much.
 
2018-02-06 03:49:19 AM  
wildly premature pulled out of my ass Prediction: That was Brady's last Super Bowl and the last for Pats for at least a decade.
 
2018-02-06 07:31:52 AM  
Wait, does this mean the Patriots can claim this Super Bowl as a win that's just not universally agreed upon? Judges?
 
2018-02-06 08:04:30 AM  

tommyl66: Wait, does this mean the Patriots can claim this Super Bowl as a win that's just not universally agreed upon? Judges?


Why stop there?  The Patriots have TEN Super Bowl wins, only five of which are universally agreed upon.

/don't think any Pats fan would count SB XX as a "win"
//Tony Eason just got sacked again
///and again
 
2018-02-06 08:19:09 AM  

MythRender: tommyl66: Wait, does this mean the Patriots can claim this Super Bowl as a win that's just not universally agreed upon? Judges?

Why stop there?  The Patriots have TEN Super Bowl wins, only five of which are universally agreed upon.

/don't think any Pats fan would count SB XX as a "win"
//Tony Eason just got sacked again
///and again


Look, if you ignore the final 58 minutes of the game it was a Patriots blowout victory!
 
2018-02-06 08:24:24 AM  
Denver's about right, sadly. They are going to go after Cousins hard, but so are about 6 other teams, including Minnesota, who has more pieces in place.

Unless Denver gets extremely lucky with QB drafting, and VJ turns things around, I doubt they are a contender.

That said, ESPN can probably take the next few months to do some kegeling for Tom next year.
 
2018-02-06 08:36:05 AM  
Lions are severely underrated. Cowboys too high.
 
2018-02-06 08:44:14 AM  
I still want to see a GRAF, but I want something stupid, like a pie graph (yes, I know it's a pie chart, it's early).

Also, with really no other competitors, is this the only week that Brady would be a lock for the Jake?
 
2018-02-06 08:46:15 AM  

ReverendLoki: I still want to see a GRAF, but I want something stupid, like a pie graph (yes, I know it's a pie chart, it's early).

Also, with really no other competitors, is this the only week that Brady would be a lock for the Jake?


Would Amendola get it after going 0-1?
 
2018-02-06 09:02:41 AM  

tommyl66: ReverendLoki: I still want to see a GRAF, but I want something stupid, like a pie graph (yes, I know it's a pie chart, it's early).

Also, with really no other competitors, is this the only week that Brady would be a lock for the Jake?

Would Amendola get it after going 0-1?


Hmmm.. debatable, but you also have to consider who he was throwing to.  Let's face it, Tom Brady just isn't the same caliber receiver of, say, a Nick Foles...
 
2018-02-06 09:04:17 AM  

tommyl66: MythRender: tommyl66: Wait, does this mean the Patriots can claim this Super Bowl as a win that's just not universally agreed upon? Judges?

Why stop there?  The Patriots have TEN Super Bowl wins, only five of which are universally agreed upon.

/don't think any Pats fan would count SB XX as a "win"
//Tony Eason just got sacked again
///and again

Look, if you ignore the final 58 minutes of the game it was a Patriots blowout victory!


And they outscored Da Bears 7-2 in the 4th quarter.  If they'd only played eight more quarters like that, they would have come back to win the game!
 
2018-02-06 09:14:46 AM  

tommyl66: ReverendLoki: I still want to see a GRAF, but I want something stupid, like a pie graph (yes, I know it's a pie chart, it's early).

Also, with really no other competitors, is this the only week that Brady would be a lock for the Jake?

Would Amendola get it after going 0-1?


Four different players attempted passes:

Nick Foles - 28/43 for 373 yards, 3 TDs, 1 INT - 106.1 Rating
Trey Burton - 1/1 for 1 yard, 1 TD - 118.8 Rating
Tom Brady - 28/48 for 505 yards, 3 TDs, 1 FUM - 115.4 Rating
Danny Amendola - 0/1 for 0 yards, 39.6 Rating

On a pure numbers game, you'd have to give it to Amendola. Brady was throwing incredibly well until the strip sack. But, since Foles' INT wasn't his fault, and Brady's fumble was, I think you have to give it to Brady.
 
2018-02-06 09:17:45 AM  
Pats as #1 is insane.  They have no coaches left.  Butler is surely gone, and maybe Gronk, too.  No backup for a quarterback with CTE so bad that he think Donald Trump is a good president.  Face it, ESPN.  The dynasty is over.
 
2018-02-06 09:31:27 AM  

bionicjoe: jake_lex: Yeah, the Bengals look to be in about the right place.  Keeping Marvin Lewis was basically saying, "yeah, we're gonna suck again next year, might as well not saddle our new coach with a 3-13 record his first year."

Wouldn't shock me if the Bengals take over the basement of the AFC North from the Browns.

I gave up, and bought a Vikings jersey recently. 
Can't take any more of Marvin the Mediocre.


Right? I farking hate Mike Brown and his complacence with mediocrity in the name of saving himself some money.

He needs to die so Katie can take over the team.
 
2018-02-06 09:34:53 AM  
Brady racked up 600 yards and a thirty burger on what was regarded as one of the stoutest defenses in the league. The Pats didn't lose on offense. Their secondary broke down and their defensive line was shaky as hell, you can only scheme around that so much. We'll need to see what the defense looks like after free agents get signed and picks and people traded before we can put them in the top slot.
 
2018-02-06 09:56:39 AM  

Mercutio879: tommyl66: ReverendLoki: I still want to see a GRAF, but I want something stupid, like a pie graph (yes, I know it's a pie chart, it's early).

Also, with really no other competitors, is this the only week that Brady would be a lock for the Jake?

Would Amendola get it after going 0-1?

Four different players attempted passes:

Nick Foles - 28/43 for 373 yards, 3 TDs, 1 INT - 106.1 Rating
Trey Burton - 1/1 for 1 yard, 1 TD - 118.8 Rating
Tom Brady - 28/48 for 505 yards, 3 TDs, 1 FUM - 115.4 Rating
Danny Amendola - 0/1 for 0 yards, 39.6 Rating

On a pure numbers game, you'd have to give it to Amendola. Brady was throwing incredibly well until the strip sack. But, since Foles' INT wasn't his fault, and Brady's fumble was, I think you have to give it to Brady.


The Jake cares only for turnovers, and Foles has the winner's exemption.
 
2018-02-06 10:03:54 AM  

SteveGrogansGoat: Brady racked up 600 yards and a thirty burger on what was regarded as one of the stoutest defenses in the league. The Pats didn't lose on offense. Their secondary broke down and their defensive line was shaky as hell, you can only scheme around that so much. We'll need to see what the defense looks like after free agents get signed and picks and people traded before we can put them in the top slot.


Their secondary broke down? I wonder why? Weird...
 
2018-02-06 10:14:14 AM  

Rent Party: Eagles get their entire team back next year, and have two starting QBs on their roster so they're going to deal in the off-season so should have an even better team.  The have a coach with giant brass balls.  They figured out that the way to beat the Pats isn't to go into a prevent defense in the 4th quarter.

The Pats have lost their OC, DC, and their head coach is questionable.  Tom Brady is great, but what allows that team to compete as well as it does is him making 14 million a year instead of the 30 million a year he would otherwise command if he wasn't simply chasing championships and banging supermodels.   Other teams have to draft well.  The Pats have an additional Brady Bonus pool they can use to fill in gaps, but that has to come apart sometime.  Soon.


The Brady pay gap is across everything on that roster.  Gronk is making peanuts too.  They try to re-sign players at reasonable (below their free agency value) cost with a year left on their contract - or they understand they'll part ways.

The Patriots personnel dept. stockpiles draft picks and tries to replace the people a year before they go.*

This is how they're competitive year in and out while the Seattles and Denvers come and go.

*Well, that's the intent.  As we all witnessed this year, the defesive line and linebacking groups are a dumpster fire and need a rebuild.
The o-line needs an upgrade.  The quarterback will be 41.  Half the backs and receivers need extensions.
 
2018-02-06 10:27:17 AM  
The patriots lose the Superbowl and lose both OC and DC.  Philly is already over the cap for 2018 with existing contracts so cutstrades are coming.  Put both in the 8-12 range.
 
2018-02-06 10:43:14 AM  
Hey Eagles fans, Saints fan here. Now you know what Saints fans felt like before and after slaying the once mighty Peyton Manning. All the talk was about how Manning lost the game. All the predictors were for him and Colts to win the next year. Got no respect and dont care. Y'all go party with the Lobardi that you whipped Patriots and TomBradys ASS for fair and square. Just do me a favor and remember what ESPN's opinion is worth every time you are thinking of tuning in to a sports show for opinions. ecause they dont like you and cant be made to give you any props while they are talking Tom Brady and Bill Belichick and the New England Designated Champions
 
2018-02-06 10:48:49 AM  

phimuskapsi: I dunno how they give Pats number one after losing their OC and DC in one fell swoop (and likely some of their other staff).

Nevermind losing the Super Bowl.


Well, in their defense, losing Patricia might look like an upgrade to some people? :P
 
2018-02-06 11:00:03 AM  
By the way, a stat I realized this morning and I don't know if it's been covered yet.  With the Eagles win, the NFC East is now the first division in the NFL with all four teams having won a Super Bowl. The next closest divisions are the NFC West (3 Super Bowl teams + the Cards with two NFL championships), the AFC West (3 Super Bowl teams + the Chargers with an AFL championship) and the AFC East (3 Super Bowl Teams + the Bills with two AFL titles). The NFC North, NFC South and AFC North all have two teams with Super Bowl wins, and the AFC South has just the Colts' wins.

The only other division in the big four sports leagues to equal this feat? The AL Central, which has been so since the 1998 realignment put the Tigers into the division.
 
2018-02-06 11:19:03 AM  
FTFA: A franchise quarterback and influx of talent could be headed to Cleveland this offseason. Wins might not be far behind.

But you're still last in the rankings.
 
2018-02-06 11:31:57 AM  
WHAR GRAF
 
2018-02-06 11:37:36 AM  

gunsmack: LessO2: Yeah, brought to you by the same "experts" who in 2016 who gave Lurie a C- grade, for hiring Pederson -- sixth place out of six coaching hires.

"Expert" has no meaning, particularly in sports. Since Teddy Atlas got pulled,  I don't think ESPN has many folks on the (rapidly diminishing) payroll who have any more expertise than that octopus who picks World Cup winners.

/ and those still employed there have to be beyond dizzy from circling the drain at a pace that makes Uber look like a sensible long term investment


Channeling my old man (peace be upon him)...  "An ex is a has been and a spurt is a drip under pressure."
 
2018-02-06 11:46:43 AM  

mikaloyd: Hey Eagles fans, Saints fan here. Now you know what Saints fans felt like before and after slaying the once mighty Peyton Manning. All the talk was about how Manning lost the game. All the predictors were for him and Colts to win the next year. Got no respect and dont care. Y'all go party with the Lobardi that you whipped Patriots and TomBradys ASS for fair and square. Just do me a favor and remember what ESPN's opinion is worth every time you are thinking of tuning in to a sports show for opinions. ecause they dont like you and cant be made to give you any props while they are talking Tom Brady and Bill Belichick and the New England Designated Champions


Let me just add to this that there isn't a Patriots fan around here that thinks ESPN is worth the data it uses.

or that Tom Brady had much of anything to do with losing on Sunday as much as Philadelphia fully won it.

This is a bit different from The Saints win in the 2009 season, so very, very long ago, when New Orleans was just lucky to be there and even luckier to match up against a similarly one-dimensional Colts team, on fumes after Tony Dungy's exit.  The Saints have that one win but zero that we unanimously agree upon.
 
2018-02-06 11:47:56 AM  

phimuskapsi: I dunno how they give Pats number one after losing their OC and DC in one fell swoop (and likely some of their other staff).

Nevermind losing the Super Bowl.


Who in the AFC is going to beat them?

You can pencil in 5 wins in division. They draw the AFC South, so 3-4 wins there. The NFC North (Packers and Vikings home, Lions and Bears away), so at least 3 there. Then KC and Pittsburgh. So at least 1 (Tomlin can't beat Belichick).

I don't see fewer than 12 wins on their schedule. 10 if Brady gets hurt.
 
2018-02-06 11:50:46 AM  

Mercutio879: SteveGrogansGoat: Brady racked up 600 yards and a thirty burger on what was regarded as one of the stoutest defenses in the league. The Pats didn't lose on offense. Their secondary broke down and their defensive line was shaky as hell, you can only scheme around that so much. We'll need to see what the defense looks like after free agents get signed and picks and people traded before we can put them in the top slot.

Their secondary broke down? I wonder why? Weird...


The Butler did it.
 
2018-02-06 12:07:53 PM  

lilbjorn: They have no coaches left.


There's only one coach that really matters as long as he's there.

lilbjorn: Butler is surely gone


It's a loss for sure, but how impactful?

lilbjorn: maybe Gronk, too


That one will hurt, but didn't they just win last year without him?

lilbjorn: No backup for a quarterback


I wouldn't factor a backup QB into the power rankings.


/hates the Patriots, but the #1 ranking isn't nearly as egregious as you think
 
2018-02-06 01:11:58 PM  

Slow To Return: Unless the Jets, Bills and Dolphins merge into one Super Team*, I'm pretty sure the Patriots are a lock to repeat as AFC Least champs yet again.

* And even then, I'd probably still bet on New England.


You could probably form a pretty awesome team merging them, especially on defense.

But then you look at the QB...
 
2018-02-06 07:55:34 PM  
It's kinda stupid to do this now. Wait until the start of next season to do the polls. Injuries, retirements, free agencies and the draft will change the complexion of many teams to even wonder about next year now is dumb.
 
2018-02-06 07:57:05 PM  

This text is now purple: phimuskapsi: I dunno how they give Pats number one after losing their OC and DC in one fell swoop (and likely some of their other staff).

Nevermind losing the Super Bowl.

Who in the AFC is going to beat them?

You can pencil in 5 wins in division. They draw the AFC South, so 3-4 wins there. The NFC North (Packers and Vikings home, Lions and Bears away), so at least 3 there. Then KC and Pittsburgh. So at least 1 (Tomlin can't beat Belichick).

I don't see fewer than 12 wins on their schedule. 10 if Brady gets hurt.


Their OC is going to be coming back Josh turned down the Colts job.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report