Well ESPN might have the Hawks as number 1 in the rankings but good'ol Pete Prisco begs to differ. Not 1 not 2 not 3 guess where?
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/2195 ... s-time-now

Works for me. It's all speculation anyway based on history, stats and guesswork.

I'll take #5. It wasn't that long ago we used to think #25 was a fair reflection...

Man how far things have come. . .

Not much to argue there. I'd move the Falcons down a few spots and the Saints up a few spots. Everything else looks fair.

you're telling me we were ranked #7 last week? hahahaha

Also there is no way we lose to New England or Atlanta in a neutral field. Isn't that how these rankings are based? on neutral fields?

Axx wrote:you're telling me we were ranked #7 last week? hahahaha

Also there is no way we lose to New England or Atlanta in a neutral field. Isn't that how these rankings are based? on neutral fields?

They aren't weekly rankings. This is the first one CBS has done since their final 2012-13 rankings.

Pissquick is a douche. He has Dallas at 13 that's all you need to know about this twits football knowledge, which is close to zero!

Sports Hernia wrote:Pissquick is a douche. He has Dallas at 13 that's all you need to know about this twits football knowledge, which is close to zero!

Say what you will, but he was a huge proponent of Sherman and Wilson last year. Long before it was cool.

it matters not

Yoda

I have no problem with that ranking. We have yet to prove that we are the top team in the league. We have to do that when the season starts up.

RolandDeschain wrote:

Sports Hernia wrote:Pissquick is a douche. He has Dallas at 13 that's all you need to know about this twits football knowledge, which is close to zero!

Say what you will, but he was a huge proponent of Sherman and Wilson last year. Long before it was cool.

Point taken, but he also has been a Hawk hater before that was cool as well.

I really don't get how the Patriots beat us out after we beat them last year, that's just bias, they did not improve much, nor have they earned the spot, except for having Brady and past glory.

But like was already said it is meaningless and I like seeing us move down, I think Pete and this team can handle being glorified in the media, but I'd still just be more comfortable being dissed as usual and having something to complain about as my Team proves the naysayers to be idiots.

SeAhAwKeR4life wrote:I really don't get how the Patriots beat us out after we beat them last year, that's just bias, they did not improve much, nor have they earned the spot, except for having Brady and past glory.

But like was already said it is meaningless and I like seeing us move down, I think Pete and this team can handle being glorified in the media, but I'd still just be more comfortable being dissed as usual and having something to complain about as my Team proves the naysayers to be idiots.

Sounds, like you, as well as some other posters, have an inferiority complex going on.

therealjohncarlson wrote:

SeAhAwKeR4life wrote:I really don't get how the Patriots beat us out after we beat them last year, that's just bias, they did not improve much, nor have they earned the spot, except for having Brady and past glory.

But like was already said it is meaningless and I like seeing us move down, I think Pete and this team can handle being glorified in the media, but I'd still just be more comfortable being dissed as usual and having something to complain about as my Team proves the naysayers to be idiots.

Sounds, like you, as well as some other posters, have an inferiority complex going on.

No, not really, and I'm not sure what you are arguing? Do you think the Patriots deserve that spot? I have a little trouble seeing the niners there because I don't think Kaep is even close to "proven".

The Patriots have the league's best QB, the league's best coach, won more games, and got further than us last year. Hardly a stretch to have them higher.

All the points you make are valid Rat, but no one can reasonably argue that they have a more complete roster than we do. Everyone around the league understands how stacked our team is. Our weakest position is kicker... plus we beat them last year. We legitimately deserve to be above the Patriots

The Yugoslavian wrote:All the points you make are valid Rat, but no one can reasonably argue that they have a more complete roster than we do. Everyone around the league understands how stacked our team is. Our weakest position is kicker... plus we beat them last year. We legitimately deserve to be above the Patriots

Our weakest position is DT, not kicker. And a one-point win at home hardly established our dominance over them.

Both are great teams. Heck, I'd say that Patriots-Seahawks is one of the top 3 most likely Super Bowl scenarios for next year. I even agree that the Seahawks have a stronger roster, but when you have Tom Brady and Bill Belichick, I have a hard time calling it "unreasonable" to say that we're not unequivocally the better team. The Patriots are damn good.

Technically kicker is our weakest considering we don't have one. They are damn good, don't get me wrong. I just can't see a valid argument for them being ranked higher than us at this time. Maybe you are right though, both are great teams and everyone has their opinion

Pete Prisco would rather suck on asbestos-laced sandpaper than ever put the Seahawks at #1 in his Power Rankings.

I feel like the Seahawks are objectively the #1 team, and it's just a matter of whether you accept that idea or not. They finished #1 in DVOA last season, they had one of the 10 best DVOA seasons since 1991, and they had a shot at breaking the weighted DVOA record going into week 17. Their rise from 2009 to 2012 is one of the largest in NFL history.

Since the end of the 2012 season they've added a pair of top five free agents to their pass rush and traded for a guy that would have likely been the #1 free agent had he been available. Most of their team is young and still trending up. Not only is this the best team in the NFL, people should start asking themselves if this might be a potential dynasty team- the evil team everyone hates because you can't stop them- something like the current Miami Heat team but in the NFL. This team is rapidly approaching an historic classification in terms of talent, IMO.

This is a team that became the first in the Superbowl era to score 150 points over 3 weeks, AND they finished with the #1 scoring defense and a top 3 special teams group. You can attempt to make a case for other teams, but it's not a very convincing one compared to Seattle.

kearly wrote:I feel like the Seahawks are objectively the #1 team, and it's just a matter of whether you accept that idea or not. They finished #1 in DVOA last season, they had one of the 10 best DVOA seasons since 1991, and they had a shot at breaking the weighted DVOA record going into week 17. Their rise from 2009 to 2012 is one of the largest in NFL history.

Since the end of the 2012 season they've added a pair of top five free agents to their pass rush and traded for a guy that would have likely been the #1 free agent had he been available. Most of their team is young and still trending up. Not only is this the best team in the NFL, people should start asking themselves if this might be a potential dynasty team- the evil team everyone hates because you can't stop them- something like the current Miami Heat team but in the NFL. This team is rapidly approaching an historic classification in terms of talent, IMO.

This is a team that became the first in the Superbowl era to score 150 points over 3 weeks, AND they finished with the #1 scoring defense and a top 3 special teams group. You can attempt to make a case for other teams, but it's not a very convincing one compared to Seattle.

Talk like this scares me, because we are one injury away from you having to look back and say, 'What was I thinking?'

I think on paper we are the best, but at the same time, I think there are too many teams too close for us to feel quite that assured of success. Perhaps I've been a Seahawk fan too long? Maybe that's why talk like the quoted post scares me.

Love his reasoning. The Bronco's will just grab someone to fill in Dummerville's spot and the Niners are good because they have 14 picks.

You really shouldn't ignore the loss of Welker even with Amendola. Amendola needs to show he can stay healthy and even then is a huge step down from Welker. There is chemistry to consider too.

Not even a mention of Harbin for the hawks and the additions of Avril and Bennett are being combined as a replacement for Clemons. Sorry but that is ignoring reality or better described as ignorance.

This IMO is a fluff piece designed to get the most readers from the larger fan bases. Way to many assumptions for the favored teams while ignoring factors for others.

aaaaahhh.. that's more like it... back to being underestimated... feels good like an old pair of worn out levi's..

SeAhAwKeR4life wrote:

kearly wrote:I feel like the Seahawks are objectively the #1 team, and it's just a matter of whether you accept that idea or not. They finished #1 in DVOA last season, they had one of the 10 best DVOA seasons since 1991, and they had a shot at breaking the weighted DVOA record going into week 17. Their rise from 2009 to 2012 is one of the largest in NFL history.

Since the end of the 2012 season they've added a pair of top five free agents to their pass rush and traded for a guy that would have likely been the #1 free agent had he been available. Most of their team is young and still trending up. Not only is this the best team in the NFL, people should start asking themselves if this might be a potential dynasty team- the evil team everyone hates because you can't stop them- something like the current Miami Heat team but in the NFL. This team is rapidly approaching an historic classification in terms of talent, IMO.

This is a team that became the first in the Superbowl era to score 150 points over 3 weeks, AND they finished with the #1 scoring defense and a top 3 special teams group. You can attempt to make a case for other teams, but it's not a very convincing one compared to Seattle.

Talk like this scares me, because we are one injury away from you having to look back and say, 'What was I thinking?'

I think on paper we are the best, but at the same time, I think there are too many teams too close for us to feel quite that assured of success. Perhaps I've been a Seahawk fan too long? Maybe that's why talk like the quoted post scares me.

Which 1 injury, exactly? We've got solid depth all over the place and 8 draft picks that will have to be STELLAR to crack the starting line up.

This one is much like one I saw on NFL.com last week. Same top 5 with a slightly different order, and us at number 4 instead of 5 IIRC.

Basically these polls are nothing more than opinions at this point. We are a long way and a lot of transactions around the league away from even playing pre season games, let alone anything that counts. It's pretty obvious that media across the country seem to be taking us more seriously this year than they have in a long time. Whether we are ranked #1, #4 or #5 doesn't really matter, as the top teams really will be interchangeable throughout the season.

I wish Vegas books did power rankings. Beyond the odds that are skewed by betting expectations. To many of theses power poles are written by bias fan favorites or for fan base conversation. It really is what takes the credibility out of them.

RichNhansom wrote:I wish Vegas books did power rankings. Beyond the odds that are skewed by betting expectations. To many of theses power poles are written by bias fan favorites or for fan base conversation. It really is what takes the credibility out of them.

Don't you realize that they aren't supposed to be "credible" in the first place? These power polls in the NFL aren't like college polls that determine anything, they are merely fodder for more conversation and attention.

Finally ! Disrespected.

All I can take from these rankings is that we are in the conversation when they talk about teams that will compete for the SB. I'd say anybody in the top 6 to 8 teams have the potential to put together a championship year. Now it comes down to how the ball bounces and injuries during the season to see who gets the brass ring. Just glad to be finally back in this conversation

RichNhansom wrote:You really shouldn't ignore the loss of Welker even with Amendola. Amendola needs to show he can stay healthy and even then is a huge step down from Welker.

Welker has also dropped more passes per targeted throw at him than any other receiver in the NFL over the past 3 years, for receivers with a lot of targets.

I think the 49ers are the most overrated team.

It makes no sense to me that the pundits are saying that 49ers and Seahawks offseason are comparable. IMO that's erroneous.

YOu add a end of career WR Bolden, and that's somehow equal to 25 year old Percy Harvin? Not even close.

They lose their starting safety and a good deal of depth at DT, along with their H-back TE. That's alot more negative than positive from where I sit.

Whereas Seattle adds 2 dynamic pass rushers.

As for the others, Denver's #1 dispite the screw up with Dumervil. How does losing him = a good thing?

Amendola is always hurt. The Falcons are without their best pass rusher. So all these teams have serious question marks going into the season.

i don't like being ranked that high anyways. Obviously the team is built pretty well, but I just want them to get playing. I want them to earn the number one spot. Frankly, at the end of last season, after their win in the playoffs and the great comeback in ATL, I would have been fine with 5.

But Prissy still has to suffer some sort of pain.. I just want the media to keep doubting the Hawks, it keeps them fired up. I have no doubt that between MikeRob, Wilson, Sherman, Lynch and Wagner that these guys will keep the team hungry though. They want to win it all, they know they can, they just need to get there.