Fans Rank Ravens 7th Best In NFL

[Ed_Reed_Pick_Six]

[url="http://blogs.nfl.com/2010/06/07/saints-top-fan-rankings-32-in-32-series-begins/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter"]Link[/url]

From over 100,000 ballots; fans have nominated the defending Champion [b]New Orleans Saints as the team to beat this season. [/b]

[b]Colts[/b] are [b]2nd[/b], [b]Vikings 3rd[/b] and our first week rival [b]Jets[/b] are [b]4th[/b].

NFC front runners [b]Dallas and Green Bay fill 5th and 6th[/b] respectively, [b]with our Baltimore Ravens listed 7th[/b] - just before the San Diego Chargers in 8th.

Having no doubt seen Steve Wyche's 2nd place ranking, what do you think of these rankings?

[eandb17]

I would say we are about the fifth best team in the league depending whether Favre comes back. The other thing is the Ravens are not under the National Spotlight. A lot of people in those rankings probably don't know the NFl that well and just pick the teams they know the best. The Ravens are definitely higher than 7th. Probably top 5 team.

[PlayLikeAFan]

I would do:
1. Saints
2. Colts
3. Vikings(if Favre returns)
4. Ravens
5. Packers
6. Jets
7. Cowboys

I'm positive we will be better then the Jets this year, the packers will do really well again and will probably be on par or close to us this season and I dont see the cowboys doing too much, make playoffs and lose again.

[1/28/01]

[quote name='PlayLikeAFan' date='07 June 2010 - 09:54 AM' timestamp='1275918840' post='418748']
I would do:
1. Saints
2. Colts
3. Vikings(if Favre returns)
4. Ravens
5. Packers
6. Jets
7. Cowboys

I'm positive we will be better then the Jets this year, the packers will do really well again and will probably be on par or close to us this season and I dont see the cowboys doing too much, make playoffs and lose again.
[/quote]
This seems about right....I'd have to agree here.

[Ngata92NT]

The Ravens are probably the most frightening team coming into this year. We have unlimited potential, more than any other team IMO. But our offense is still maturing and we haven't proven much yet. We have the chance to be elite on both sides of the ball.

The only other teams that scare me coming into this season are the Packers and Vikings, because they are built similar to the Ravens, balanced on offense and defense. And the Saints, because their offense is nearly unstoppable.

[AwakenTheDemon]

I did this a week or so ago:
[IMG]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/Kajirou/TeamRankings-1.jpg[/IMG]

Fourth best, sorry Jets, and Cowgirls.

[Ngata92NT]

[quote name='AwakenTheDemon' date='07 June 2010 - 12:16 PM' timestamp='1275930991' post='418825']
I did this a week or so ago:
[IMG]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/Kajirou/TeamRankings-1.jpg[/IMG]

Fourth best, sorry Jets, and Cowgirls.
[/quote]


You seem pretty high on Pittsburgh, what do you know that we don't? All signs would indicate they'll have a mediocre season.

[berad]

[quote name='Ngata92NT' date='07 June 2010 - 01:30 PM' timestamp='1275931810' post='418831']
You seem pretty high on Pittsburgh, what do you know that we don't? All signs would indicate they'll have a mediocre season.
[/quote]

They're the Pittsburgh Steelers - just their name indicates the opposite. Believe me, I would love for the Steelers to play poorly again this season but the fact is that they haven't missed the playoffs in back-to-back seasons since 1999 and 2000. They've had a tough offseason, sure, but I wouldn't take them lightly.

[darklight1216]

I'm very surprised that the Ravens were ranked higher than the fan favorite Chargers. Offseason power ranks are meaningless, as we all know, but I didn't expect the fans to think that highly of Balimore. I usually hear "this is the year the defense falls apart," and "I'm not sold on Flacco," so it's nice that so many fans think so highly of Baltimore.

[AwakenTheDemon]

[quote name='Ngata92NT' date='07 June 2010 - 12:30 PM' timestamp='1275931810' post='418831']
You seem pretty high on Pittsburgh, what do you know that we don't? All signs would indicate they'll have a mediocre season.
[/quote]

1. It's only six games without Roethlisberger.
2. Leftwich or Dixon should still be able to win at least ONE game (Bucs) in their six games without Ben.
3. Wallace might not make the clutch performances of Holmes, but he's shown he can produce and be more than serviceable as Holmes' replacement.
4. Mendenhall can run the ball, and he can do it well. If they do in fact go back to a run-first offense, they will still win games.
5. Polamalu shouldn't miss the majority of the games this year, so their defense should actually stop opposing teams.
6. It's the Steelers.

Those of you who are seriously expecting the Steelers to completely meltdown just because of six games without Ben and Holmes being gone need to open your eyes, just a little bit. The Steelers still have more than enough to be a good team this year. I know we all expect the Ravens to sit atop the North (I do as well), but the thought of the Steelers as just being a mediocre team is naive. I despise Pittsburgh just as much as anyone else (if not more so seeing as I live only an hour from Pittsburgh), but you can't deny that they turn it around better than most teams.

[berad]

6 games for Ben*

It may be that it will be reduced to 4 but, for now, it's still a 6 game suspension.

[AwakenTheDemon]

So add in Cleveland and Miami, not much really changes.

[berad]

[quote name='AwakenTheDemon' date='07 June 2010 - 01:48 PM' timestamp='1275932922' post='418846']
So add in Cleveland and Miami, not much really changes.
[/quote]

I agree, Steelers (with him or not) should be able to handle those teams, but Ben's still out. That's all I was saying.

[AwakenTheDemon]

[quote name='berad' date='07 June 2010 - 12:51 PM' timestamp='1275933111' post='418847']
I agree, Steelers (with him or not) should be able to handle those teams, but Ben's still out. That's all I was saying.
[/quote]

I know =P I just woke up not too long ago, so I must have confused Ben and Holmes' suspensions. It's hard to keep all those Steelers/Ex-Steelers suspensions straight in your head.

[berad]

[quote name='AwakenTheDemon' date='07 June 2010 - 01:52 PM' timestamp='1275933170' post='418849']
I know =P I just woke up not too long ago, so I must have confused Ben and Holmes' suspensions. It's hard to keep all those Steelers/Ex-Steelers suspensions straight in your head.
[/quote]

Tell me about it. And lucky you, sleeping in past noon.

Anywho, back on topic: I would be wary to put the Packers below us so soon. The [url="http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009120700/2009/REG13/ravens@packers/recap"]handled us[/url] pretty effectively last year shutting down Ray Rice and forcing Flacco into INTs. They're a really good team - should have beaten the Cardinals in that playoff game.

That said, we could prove to be better than them this season but that won't be for a few months...

[RavensAllTheWay]

Is it just me or are we in for some surprises this season? (Talking about the rest of the league).

[Malkavian Raven]

I had them: Saints, Vikings, Colts, Ravens, Jets, Packers, Cowboys -- Living in Indiana, there's a lot of drama circulating about many of their starters not signing their tenders yet. The focus (as if I need to say it) is around Peyti-Pie's contract; once that's finalized then they'll worry about the likes of Reggie Wayne, Robert Mathis and Antwan Bethea. They've yet to participate in OTAs.

That's why I put them below the Vikings.

The Jets/Packers flip-flop is because I don't see the Packers generating as much promise or problems for the opposition. Even though they have the slightly tougher of two schedules, I still think the Jets should finish better. That and I'm still a loyal Rex Ryan fan.

[Ngata92NT]

[quote name='AwakenTheDemon' date='07 June 2010 - 12:42 PM' timestamp='1275932561' post='418839']
1. It's only six games without Roethlisberger.
2. Leftwich or Dixon should still be able to win at least ONE game (Bucs) in their six games without Ben.
3. Wallace might not make the clutch performances of Holmes, but he's shown he can produce and be more than serviceable as Holmes' replacement.
4. Mendenhall can run the ball, and he can do it well. If they do in fact go back to a run-first offense, they will still win games.
5. Polamalu shouldn't miss the majority of the games this year, so their defense should actually stop opposing teams.
6. It's the Steelers.

Those of you who are seriously expecting the Steelers to completely meltdown just because of six games without Ben and Holmes being gone need to open your eyes, just a little bit. The Steelers still have more than enough to be a good team this year. I know we all expect the Ravens to sit atop the North (I do as well), but the thought of the Steelers as just being a mediocre team is naive. I despise Pittsburgh just as much as anyone else (if not more so seeing as I live only an hour from Pittsburgh), but you can't deny that they turn it around better than most teams.
[/quote]

I didn't say the Steelers were mediocre, I said I expect their season to be mediocre. In case you don't remember they missed the playoffs last year and they've likely regressed rather than progressed in this offseason. What makes you think they'll actually improve? The only think I can think of is a healthy Polamalu, but is that really enough to turn them back into an elite team?

In contrast to Pittsburgh, the Ravens and Bengals seem to have improved (especially the Ravens). And looking at Pittsburgh's schedule, they play Tennessee, Atlanta (w/o berger), New England, Miami, New Orleans, Jets, and Carolina. I could see them losing quite a few of those games, and combining that with an extremely tough division their playoff chances don't look good.

I agree that you can never know with Pittsburgh and that they always have a chance to win. But I think our rivalry with them clouds our judgment a bit.

[AwakenTheDemon]

[quote name='Ngata92NT' date='07 June 2010 - 09:33 PM' timestamp='1275964421' post='419200']
I didn't say the Steelers were mediocre, I said I expect their season to be mediocre. In case you don't remember they missed the playoffs last year and they've likely regressed rather than progressed in this offseason. What makes you think they'll actually improve? The only think I can think of is a healthy Polamalu, but is that really enough to turn them back into an elite team?

In contrast to Pittsburgh, the Ravens and Bengals seem to have improved (especially the Ravens). And looking at Pittsburgh's schedule, they play Tennessee, Atlanta (w/o berger), New England, Miami, New Orleans, Jets, and Carolina. I could see them losing quite a few of those games, and combining that with an extremely tough division their playoff chances don't look good.

I agree that you can never know with Pittsburgh and that they always have a chance to win. But I think our rivalry with them clouds our judgment a bit.
[/quote]

You're acting as if Pittsburgh had no chance to make the playoffs. They went 9-7 and just narrowly missing making it an AFC North post season. A healthy Polamalu goes a looong way for them defensively, as we saw last year. If you look, there isn't a whole lot of regression for Pittsburgh. The only huge name they lost was Holmes, and Wallace will do absolutely fine in his place. All that does is make the third receiver a little less than stellar.

Their six games without Ben are Atlanta, Tennessee, Tampa Bay, Baltimore, Cleveland, and Miami. Dixon and Leftwich are no Ben, but they can do just fine for six games. However, Mendenhall can and will run the ball, so they won't be anemic on offense. Remember, Pittsburgh was all about rushing the ball and playing defense for [i]years[/i]. Despite this turning into a passing league, Pittsburgh can revert to prototypical Pittsburgh football for six games, if need be, and still walk away with some wins. They have very, very good chances against Tampa Bay and Cleveland, so they could very well walk away 2-4, if not better. I've learned to never, ever take the Steelers lightly. Remember when we thought we could walk all over Dixon last year and ended up getting taken into overtime?

Also, I wouldn't throw the Bengals in there just due to last year's success. They've had good seasons before, but have never proven to be a consistent threat in the division. This will be their year to show that they are legit and ready to shed the Bungels nickname.

[Ed_Reed_Pick_Six]

7th is fine by me I think.

I think the Jets should be more like #9 though. I don't see them back in the AFC Championship Game.

Dallas is a team to watch out for I believe, I personally ranked them about 4th. That team is so deep.

[ed.s52]

Jets at number 4? Give me a break. They would have missed the playoffs if it wasn't handed to them, They only won the Bengals game because Graham was horrific, The Colts dismantled them. We lost to the Colts too, but we did much better than the Jets.

Not to mention the fact that they lost Faneca and Thomas Jones (by replacing him with LT, and Sanchez isn't likely to produce this season considering he was horrific last season.

Holmes is suspended, and is overrated mostly because he was the perfect match to Rothlesberger. Braylon drops balls. Cothery is good, but not great. Shonne Grenne has a lot of pressure on him to produce this season, because if he doesn't the Jets are screwed.

They let go of Kerry Rhodes, and if Cromartie doesn't step it up than their corners (besides Revis island) aren't even that great.

Give me a break the Jet's are closer to 10 than 4 in this league

[JO_75]

[quote name='berad' date='07 June 2010 - 01:36 PM' timestamp='1275932176' post='418834']
They're the Pittsburgh Steelers - just their name indicates the opposite. Believe me, I would love for the Steelers to play poorly again this season but [b]the fact is that they haven't missed the playoffs in back-to-back seasons since 1999 and 2000.[/b] They've had a tough offseason, sure, but I wouldn't take them lightly.
[/quote]

HM.... just a thought here, 1999 and 2000, well 10 years later could history repeat itself? They already missed in 2009, could they miss in 2010?


[quote name='ed.s52' date='08 June 2010 - 02:10 PM' timestamp='1276020625' post='419475']
Jets at number 4? Give me a break. [b]They would have missed the playoffs if it wasn't handed to them,[/b] They only won the Bengals game because Graham was horrific, The Colts dismantled them. We lost to the Colts too, but we did much better than the Jets.

Not to mention the fact that they lost Faneca and Thomas Jones (by replacing him with LT, and Sanchez isn't likely to produce this season considering he was horrific last season.

Holmes is suspended, and is overrated mostly because he was the perfect match to Rothlesberger. Braylon drops balls. Cothery is good, but not great. Shonne Grenne has a lot of pressure on him to produce this season, because if he doesn't the Jets are screwed.

They let go of Kerry Rhodes, and if Cromartie doesn't step it up than their corners (besides Revis island) aren't even that great.

Give me a break the Jet's are closer to 10 than 4 in this league
[/quote]

EXACTLY! Someone else agrees with me. I refuse to give the Jets any credit for what they did in the playoffs because of the fact they were handed the wild card spot on a silver platter. The Texans should have gotten that spot and were robbed by Indy and Cincy. The Media refuses to bring this up, they refuse to say how the Colts handed them a victory in the regular season. They kiss up to the Jets like they earned their playoff spot, earned... what did they earn? NOTHING! The media needs face the facts and stop crowning them, we wouldn't be talking about them if they weren't handed their playoff spot. Rant Over!

[berad]

[quote name='JO_75' date='08 June 2010 - 09:36 PM' timestamp='1276047419' post='419723']
HM.... just a thought here, 1999 and 2000, well 10 years later could history repeat itself? They already missed in 2009, could they miss in 2010?
[/quote]

Yeah it could. But every time people count the Steelers out, they come back with a vengeance - that's what I'm saying. I don't think the Steelers are on some mystical 10-year calender but I would love for them to have another sub-par season.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

[quote name='berad' date='08 June 2010 - 09:27 PM' timestamp='1276050478' post='419753']
Yeah it could. But every time people count the Steelers out, they come back with a vengeance - that's what I'm saying. I don't think the Steelers are on some mystical 10-year calender but I would love for them to have another sub-par season.
[/quote]


hahaha... mystical calendar lol. i only hope this 10 year calendar exists bc that means SUPER BOWL trophy comes back to baltimore where it belongs!

[berad]

[quote name='BOLDnPurPnBlacK' date='09 June 2010 - 12:38 AM' timestamp='1276058327' post='419833']
hahaha... mystical calendar lol. i only hope this 10 year calendar exists bc that means SUPER BOWL trophy comes back to baltimore where it belongs!
[/quote]

Well, in that case, I'm a believer! I'll +1 that!

[AwakenTheDemon]

[quote name='JO_75' date='08 June 2010 - 08:36 PM' timestamp='1276047419' post='419723']
[b]EXACTLY! Someone else agrees with me. I refuse to give the Jets any credit for what they did in the playoffs because of the fact they were handed the wild card spot on a silver platter.[/b] The Texans should have gotten that spot and were robbed by Indy and Cincy. The Media refuses to bring this up, they refuse to say how the Colts handed them a victory in the regular season. They kiss up to the Jets like they earned their playoff spot, earned... what did they earn? NOTHING! The media needs face the facts and stop crowning them, we wouldn't be talking about them if they weren't handed their playoff spot. Rant Over!
[/quote]

I've felt the same way ever since the Colts gave that game away. The Jets were given their playoff berth, they did not earn it.

[darklight1216]

[quote name='JO_75' date='08 June 2010 - 09:36 PM' timestamp='1276047419' post='419723']
EXACTLY! Someone else agrees with me. I refuse to give the Jets any credit for what they did in the playoffs because of the fact they were handed the wild card spot on a silver platter. The Texans should have gotten that spot and were robbed by Indy and Cincy. The Media refuses to bring this up, they refuse to say how the Colts handed them a victory in the regular season. They kiss up to the Jets like they earned their playoff spot, earned... what did they earn? NOTHING! The media needs face the facts and stop crowning them, we wouldn't be talking about them if they weren't handed their playoff spot. Rant Over!
[/quote]
The Texans weren't robbed; they just weren't good enough. The fact is that the New York Jets were Championship contenders. Were they fortunate in the scheduling? Sure, but that's how it goes. At the end of the day, a win is a win.

[ed.s52]

[quote name='darklight1216' date='08 June 2010 - 09:36 PM' timestamp='1276061818' post='419858']
The Texans weren't robbed; they just weren't good enough. The fact is that the New York Jets were Championship contenders. Were they fortunate in the scheduling? Sure, but that's how it goes. At the end of the day, a win is a win.
[/quote]

If the Jets could actually hang with the Colts than maybe I would agree with this. But the Colts were DEMOLISHING them 20-3 or something like that at the half and they literally gave it to the Jets.

My point is the Jets showed that when the playoffs are on the line and they are facing the #1 seed with nothing to play for, they are still gonna get raped, until they put in the 3rd stringers.

The Jets didnt earn anything and if the Colts and Bengals actually played they wouldnt have reached 500 and wouldve ended wit a 7-9 record, or maybe an 8-8 record, which still isnt good enough for the playoffs.

You can justify it by saying a win is a win, and at the end of the day it is, but the point I am making is that they didnt win because "they were good enough", they won because the other teams gave them the wins.

[darklight1216]

[quote name='ed.s52' date='09 June 2010 - 04:09 PM' timestamp='1276114198' post='420095']
If the Jets could actually hang with the Colts than maybe I would agree with this. But the Colts were DEMOLISHING them 20-3 or something like that at the half and they literally gave it to the Jets.

My point is the Jets showed that when the playoffs are on the line and they are facing the #1 seed with nothing to play for, they are still gonna get raped, until they put in the 3rd stringers.

The Jets didnt earn anything and if the Colts and Bengals actually played they wouldnt have reached 500 and wouldve ended wit a 7-9 record, or maybe an 8-8 record, which still isnt good enough for the playoffs.

You can justify it by saying a win is a win, and at the end of the day it is, but the point I am making is that they didnt win because "they were good enough", they won because the other teams gave them the wins.
[/quote]
Actually, the Colts were up 15-10 when they pulled their starters. Scoring 15 points (in about 3 quarters) is not "demolishing." Perhaps you are thinking of the Colts/Ravens divisional game. That score was 20-3.

They were fortunate to play the Colts when they did, but that's how it goes.

I have to disagree with the notion that the Bengals "gave them the win." The Jets were winning before the Bengals pulled their starters and they beat them again the very next week when they were in Cincy playing a game that counted for both teams.

(It's ironic that you said that 8-8 isn't good enough to make the playoffs when a .500 team did just that in 2008.)

[ed.s52]

Yes, I know the Chargers did it in 08 only because they were playing in the weakest division in football,but I meant this year.


My bad about the Colts game, your right, but the Colts still would have most likely won if they kept playin.

I agree about the Bengals game, although they did have nothing to play for, they made a probable win into a definite win for the Jets.

My point is, lets say the Colts tried, won that game like the most likely would have since without very much motive they were still winning, and the Jets missed the playoffs going 8-8.

Would any of the media give credit to the Jets? No.
Would anybody that isn't a Jets fan have them rated #4? No.
Would anybody on this forum, or in the media talk about the Jets as contenders for the Lombardi Trophy? No.