http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/ ... y-voted-37

Seahawks are still #1.

It would be interesting to see how we live up to the hype. Pete Carroll's coaching skills will be tested now.

Lol, guess I posted this seconds after HawkFan did; somebody merge them.

SFF, I hope we start the season at #1 and never lost the spot. With how tough the NFC West is this year, nobody will be able to criticize us if we win the division.

SeahawksFanForever wrote:It would be interesting to see how we live up to the hype. Pete Carroll's coaching skills will be tested now.

Well, he coached a highly ranked college team for many years and won a lot of games......

I think he can manage.

sutz wrote:

SeahawksFanForever wrote:It would be interesting to see how we live up to the hype. Pete Carroll's coaching skills will be tested now.

Well, he coached a highly ranked college team for many years and won a lot of games......

I think he can manage.

Very true. I am really looking forward to this

I said it last power ranking and Ill say it now. We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road. It should be imo:

1) 49ers
2) Pats
3) Hawks / Broncos (tie)

Championship. Anything less would be uncivilized

therealjohncarlson wrote:We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road.

Yup

why the patriots? On a neutral field would you take the patriots over the seahawks or broncos, honestly?

therealjohncarlson wrote:I said it last power ranking and Ill say it now. We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road. It should be imo:

1) 49ers
2) Pats
3) Hawks / Broncos (tie)

agreed

Sweet! National Championship here we come!!

We won 3 out of our last 4 road games, and barely lost the 4th. Won @Chi, @Buf, @Was, and lost @Atl. Is that long-term proof that we can win on the road? No, but it's pretty damned strong evidence that we've cracked that particular nugget.

Carlson and SFF, enjoy the love. Stop looking for a 5-year string of winning 75% of road games before we're eligible to be #1 on pundit power rankings.

I think it is based on neutral site. How would you rank the Giants who can't win at home but tear it up on the road?

I agree with the ranking. Now we just need to prove it.

Rankings are based on expectations not on previous history.

With questions about Ridley's recovery, the secondary, and the receiver core, I can't imagine anyone ranking the Pats in the top 3.

I feel that it is almost un-disputable that the top three belongs to the Broncs/Whiners/Hawks in no particular order.

And yes, I'm amazed to say that the Hawks are part of the top 3.

Hawks vs. Pats for number one... mmmm. We both have outdoor fields and a similar fan-base intensity level on game day, with the 12's edging-out in the noise category. They changed-out a few key offensive players that contributed in 2012, while we only lost a return man and gained arguably the best all-around WR (sorry Mega and Andre). It would be interesting to watch the same game we won last year played inside the dome in St. Louis... I say we'd still take that neutral-field contest. This year? We smoke them lobster-eaters.

I'll take this #1 ranking, and always look forward to Tuesdays to see what the writers are thinking. Always entertaining to read the one-liner explanations. You can take it or leave it, but I choose to use the power rankings as another piece of the entertainment value my team provides me. I get a rise out of watching us move up the ranks, but have to look at it differently now, don't I?

The word "hype" doesn't sit well with me in terms of a reaction to power rankings. Hype is an attempt to get somebody jacked up and the rankings really don't do that. Rankings (in this case) are based on past results, and those results laid across an established set of criteria, then compared. In other words, it's partly fact and partly an educated prediction, not an attempt to stoke up any fires.

Being in first place on paper is a very satisfying place to be. Now it will be a little more fun watching us stay there.

Broncos are a touch overrated IMO. Easiest schedule in the league last year, and everyone in their division was awful. Losing Dumervil is big. I still put them in the top four, but I'm not convinced they're better than the Falcons.

We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road.

Gonna have to agree. But based on last year which 99% of the players are on this team that was starting to change in large part because of Russell Wilson and his refusal to accept mediocrity.

Works for me.

1. Baltimore
2. Seattle
3. Broncos
4. 49ers
5. Atlanta

therealjohncarlson wrote:I said it last power ranking and Ill say it now. We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road. It should be imo:

1) 49ers
2) Pats
3) Hawks / Broncos (tie)

I'm sorry but if you are going by "past ability" then the Ravens have to be top of anyone's power rankings

If a team that looked like it could put up 30 points on anybody last year added one of the top 5 playmakers at any position in the league and addressed it's biggest weakness by signing the two best players available at that position in free agency isn't the number 1 team going into the season, something's wrong

RichNhansom wrote:Rankings are based on expectations not on previous history.

Probably the way it should be.

But if this same exact Hawks team did all the same offseason moves and had the same draft but was coming off a ho-hum 8-8 season and out of playoffs instead of a splashy 11-5 season and a playoff victory do you really think they'd be ranked number 1 right now? Or even in the top 5?

LawlessHawk wrote:

RichNhansom wrote:Rankings are based on expectations not on previous history.

Probably the way it should be.

But if this same exact Hawks team did all the same offseason moves and had the same draft but was coming off a ho-hum 8-8 season and out of playoffs instead of a splashy 11-5 season and a playoff victory do you really think they'd be ranked number 1 right now? Or even in the top 5?

Obviously. Where do you think those expectations come from?

RolandDeschain wrote:http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/98456/nfl-power-rankings-how-they-voted-37

Seahawks are still #1.

Sando huh??? Can't say I'm surprised with the results of his power poll LOL!

But in all honesty I don't think we are going to find a power poll before the season starts that doesn't have both our teams in either combination not occupying the top 2 spots.

NinerLifer wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/98456/nfl-power-rankings-how-they-voted-37

Seahawks are still #1.

Sando huh??? Can't say I'm surprised with the results of his power poll LOL!

But in all honesty I don't think we are going to find a power poll before the season starts that doesn't have both our teams in either combination not occupying the top 2 spots.

How is it "his" poll? This is the ESPN poll with five voters, none of whom voted San Francisco #1.

therealjohncarlson wrote:I said it last power ranking and Ill say it now. We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road. It should be imo:

1) 49ers
2) Pats
3) Hawks / Broncos (tie)

True, our toughest opponents were home games last year thrilling as they were. Pats, GB, Vikings.
Losses to Detroit, Miami, Arizona on the road must be overcome.

DavidSeven wrote:

NinerLifer wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/98456/nfl-power-rankings-how-they-voted-37

Seahawks are still #1.

Sando huh??? Can't say I'm surprised with the results of his power poll LOL!

But in all honesty I don't think we are going to find a power poll before the season starts that doesn't have both our teams in either combination not occupying the top 2 spots.

How is it "his" poll? This is the ESPN poll with five voters, none of whom voted San Francisco #1.

No, no, no. See, what I did was email the 5 panelists and ask them to throw up a post-draft NFL power rankings, and to make sure Seattle was still #1. What do you know, they hopped on it like white on rice. I totally rigged the official ESPN Power Rankings panel that covers the whole thing, not just the NFC West/biased Seattle writers/whatever.

Disp nailed it!



You're really making yourself look good, Disp.

DavidSeven wrote:

NinerLifer wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/98456/nfl-power-rankings-how-they-voted-37

Seahawks are still #1.

Sando huh??? Can't say I'm surprised with the results of his power poll LOL!

But in all honesty I don't think we are going to find a power poll before the season starts that doesn't have both our teams in either combination not occupying the top 2 spots.

How is it "his" poll? This is the ESPN poll with five voters, none of whom voted San Francisco #1.

Apparently I forgot to put the "Sarcasm on" emoticon in my post. Geez fellas...

It is funny because there is another voter in his poll that has ties to Seattle as an ex-beat writer. Just sayin'...

NinerLifer wrote:It is funny because there is another voter in his poll that has ties to Seattle as an ex-beat writer. Just sayin'...

True. Clayton was pretty tough on the Seahawks last year on these polls though and doesn't seem to have any ties to the team anymore. I'm thinking Sando does have some biases toward Seattle, but he does his best to remain objective.

NinerLifer wrote:Apparently I forgot to put the "Sarcasm on" emoticon in my post. Geez fellas...

It is funny because there is another voter in his poll that has ties to Seattle as an ex-beat writer. Just sayin'...

Or you didn't click on the link, assumed it was a sando power ranking, made a stupid statement, and are now backtracking by saying it was sarcasm. Yeah, I am going with that option.

+1

bigtrain21 wrote:

NinerLifer wrote:Apparently I forgot to put the "Sarcasm on" emoticon in my post. Geez fellas...

It is funny because there is another voter in his poll that has ties to Seattle as an ex-beat writer. Just sayin'...

Or you didn't click on the link, assumed it was a sando power ranking, made a stupid statement, and are now backtracking by saying it was sarcasm. Yeah, I am going with that option.

Well...you know what they say about when you assume.

And I obviously clicked on the link to know that Clayton was one of the voters, and the simple fact that I have yet to see a "power poll" that is only voted on by one person. Have you?

And how would I have known that Sando was the author???

Some people actually choose to think before they speak.

DavidSeven wrote:

NinerLifer wrote:It is funny because there is another voter in his poll that has ties to Seattle as an ex-beat writer. Just sayin'...

True. Clayton was pretty tough on the Seahawks last year on these polls though and doesn't seem to have any ties to the team anymore. I'm thinking Sando does have some biases toward Seattle, but he does his best to remain objective.

Ya I was just pokin' fun by pointing out Clayton as he does seem to have abandoned any bias that he perhaps have had from his reporting days in Tacoma I believe it was.

NinerLifer wrote:Well...you know what they say about when you assume.

And I obviously clicked on the link to know that Clayton was one of the voters, and the simple fact that I have yet to see a "power poll" that is only voted on by one person. Have you?

And how would I have known that Sando was the author???

Some people actually choose to think before they speak.

Now it's really easy to tell you are lying. The link said blog/nfcwest which I am sure as a fan of a team in the NFC west means you know Sando is the writer for. You didn't mention Clayton until your response when you realized you were wrong. You clicked on the link after your first post. Its fine if you want to hang out here but just take your heat when you deserve it. Right now you are in a web of lies. Stop now.

Also, a ton of power rankings are done by one person.

Dayyuum, I think in this case we can abbreviation assume to simply assu. Or for correct spelling, assyou!!!

Isn't Clayton a Stealers fan, of all things? Thought I read that somewhere...

themunn wrote:

therealjohncarlson wrote:I said it last power ranking and Ill say it now. We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road. It should be imo:

1) 49ers
2) Pats
3) Hawks / Broncos (tie)

I'm sorry but if you are going by "past ability" then the Ravens have to be top of anyone's power rankings

If a team that looked like it could put up 30 points on anybody last year added one of the top 5 playmakers at any position in the league and addressed it's biggest weakness by signing the two best players available at that position in free agency isn't the number 1 team going into the season, something's wrong

I never said my ranking was based on past ability. When projecting a team's future you can't pretend to know if a roster will overcome a major weakness they had last year. And our major weakness last year was winning on the road. Until we prove we can do this consistently, I think it's fair to assume next season there is a good chance we may have this same problem.

The ravens are not at the top of my list because I feel their roster is not all that talented compared with the tops teams. They simply got hot at the perfect time (a la Giants)

Again, my roster is not really based on past ability, like you incorrectly surmised. It is based on how I think teams are most likely to perform next year based on quality of roster and team trends.

bigtrain21 wrote:

NinerLifer wrote:Well...you know what they say about when you assume.

And I obviously clicked on the link to know that Clayton was one of the voters, and the simple fact that I have yet to see a "power poll" that is only voted on by one person. Have you?

And how would I have known that Sando was the author???

Some people actually choose to think before they speak.

Now it's really easy to tell you are lying. The link said blog/nfcwest which I am sure as a fan of a team in the NFC west means you know Sando is the writer for. You didn't mention Clayton until your response when you realized you were wrong. You clicked on the link after your first post. Its fine if you want to hang out here but just take your heat when you deserve it. Right now you are in a web of lies. Stop now.

Also, a ton of power rankings are done by one person.

Well you are obviously a poor judge when it comes to interpretating someone's intentions when they post. You can try to troll all you want in this thread man, but the only one who is off the mark here is you. But go ahead and keep assuming what you want as it is becoming quite comical. Why would I care what you think anyways in this case?

ASSume away bro!

But you are correct that there are power rankings by single individuals. I will take "the heat" for my mistake on that one.

therealjohncarlson wrote:

themunn wrote:

therealjohncarlson wrote:I said it last power ranking and Ill say it now. We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road. It should be imo:

1) 49ers
2) Pats
3) Hawks / Broncos (tie)

I'm sorry but if you are going by "past ability" then the Ravens have to be top of anyone's power rankings

If a team that looked like it could put up 30 points on anybody last year added one of the top 5 playmakers at any position in the league and addressed it's biggest weakness by signing the two best players available at that position in free agency isn't the number 1 team going into the season, something's wrong

I never said my ranking was based on past ability. When projecting a team's future you can't pretend to know if a roster will overcome a major weakness they had last year. And our major weakness last year was winning on the road. Until we prove we can do this consistently, I think it's fair to assume next season there is a good chance we may have this same problem.

The ravens are not at the top of my list because I feel their roster is not all that talented compared with the tops teams. They simply got hot at the perfect time (a la Giants)

Again, my roster is not really based on past ability, like you incorrectly surmised. It is based on how I think teams are most likely to perform next year based on quality of roster and team trends.

Based on roster? Sure. But the Seahawks are leaders there.
Based on team trends... what?
Based on... things the teams have done in the past?
I certainly can't see how you can rank the Broncos as equal to the Seahawks - who failed to win a playoff game and went 1-3 against teams with a winning record last year, or have the 49ers top despite them winning the same number of games as us last year, scoring less points overall and conceding more? When our "trend" at the end of the season was winning 7 of our last 8 (as opposed to San Francisco's 5 of their last .
Either way, based on "team trends" is ranking teams by past ability, because you can't have a trend without experience to base it on.

Are the Hawks the best team in the NFL? I don't know.. but if you take a look at their situation, there is a substantial amount of data to support the argument.

The Hawks ended the season on a tear, not just the last couple weeks, but going back to the game following the first Niners game. Now they lost two the Lions and Dolphins in those 10 games, but we are talking about games in which they had late leads or overtime, with the defense giving up the late score in both. The offense was nothing short of prolific/efficient, even explosive. They found a way to win games that teams of the past would have lost.

The Roster: As a whole, the Hawks carried a ton of talent last season. The point being, the FEW players that are no longer members of the team have been replaced by better players. Avril, Bennett and Winfield? Holy Upgrades Batman. Oh yeah, that prolific offense that moved the ball and scored a ridiculous number of points in the last 10 games added a nightmare player for opposing defenses. Yikes. I have said it before, this Harvin thing is going to really be big with Wilson as the QB and the Hawks offense as a whole.

The Hawks can beat any of the teams that top that list. They may not be the best team or deserve the 1 spot, but I like their chances. The Seahawks have never fielded a team this talented, that has already proven they can play with the best. They took a great team and literally singled out the few areas they wanted help, then got it.

loafoftatupu wrote:Are the Hawks the best team in the NFL? I don't know.. but if you take a look at their situation, there is a substantial amount of data to support the argument.

The Hawks ended the season on a tear, not just the last couple weeks, but going back to the game following the first Niners game. Now they lost two the Lions and Dolphins in those 10 games, but we are talking about games in which they had late leads or overtime, with the defense giving up the late score in both. The offense was nothing short of prolific/efficient, even explosive. They found a way to win games that teams of the past would have lost.

The Roster: As a whole, the Hawks carried a ton of talent last season. The point being, the FEW players that are no longer members of the team have been replaced by better players. Avril, Bennett and Winfield? Holy Upgrades Batman. Oh yeah, that prolific offense that moved the ball and scored a ridiculous number of points in the last 10 games added a nightmare player for opposing defenses. Yikes. I have said it before, this Harvin thing is going to really be big with Wilson as the QB and the Hawks offense as a whole.

The Hawks can beat any of the teams that top that list. They may not be the best team or deserve the 1 spot, but I like their chances. The Seahawks have never fielded a team this talented, that has already proven they can play with the best. They took a great team and literally singled out the few areas they wanted help, then got it.

Loafo, how's bennet's rotator cuff injury healing?

Giedi wrote:

loafoftatupu wrote:Are the Hawks the best team in the NFL? I don't know.. but if you take a look at their situation, there is a substantial amount of data to support the argument.

The Hawks ended the season on a tear, not just the last couple weeks, but going back to the game following the first Niners game. Now they lost two the Lions and Dolphins in those 10 games, but we are talking about games in which they had late leads or overtime, with the defense giving up the late score in both. The offense was nothing short of prolific/efficient, even explosive. They found a way to win games that teams of the past would have lost.

The Roster: As a whole, the Hawks carried a ton of talent last season. The point being, the FEW players that are no longer members of the team have been replaced by better players. Avril, Bennett and Winfield? Holy Upgrades Batman. Oh yeah, that prolific offense that moved the ball and scored a ridiculous number of points in the last 10 games added a nightmare player for opposing defenses. Yikes. I have said it before, this Harvin thing is going to really be big with Wilson as the QB and the Hawks offense as a whole.

The Hawks can beat any of the teams that top that list. They may not be the best team or deserve the 1 spot, but I like their chances. The Seahawks have never fielded a team this talented, that has already proven they can play with the best. They took a great team and literally singled out the few areas they wanted help, then got it.

Loafo, how's bennet's rotator cuff injury healing?

Great another whiner fan on board here..The Mods have to stop letting this happen 10 times a day.

Wow, Bigtrain just owned Ninerlifer. Twice.

therealjohncarlson wrote:We shouldnt be #1 on anyone's power ranking until we prove we can win consistently on the road.

We had some extremely tough road losses last season. Seattle "dropped" a couple of game winners at Arizona. They lost to the Rams because of a shady trick play. They lost to the Lions because Matt Stafford just happened to be in the zone that week. They lost to the Dolphins because Pete got stubborn in the run game and got zone happy on defense, then admitted after the game that he messed up and learned his lesson. The 49ers loss could have been a Seahawks blowout win early if Seattle didn't uncharacteristally drop clutch pass after clutch pass which directly cost them points on a few occasions. Then you have the playoff game. We led with 25 seconds left and the Falcons needed to go 40+ yards.

Seattle outscored their opponents on the road last season. I don't know how many teams every year outscore their opponents on the road and go 4-6. I'm guessing it's not a long list.

Last year Seattle was a relatively strong road team with much better luck at home than on the road.

RolandDeschain wrote:http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/98456/nfl-power-rankings-how-they-voted-37

Seahawks are still #1.

I'd settle for a "bowl" appearance

Giedi wrote:Loafo, how's bennet's rotator cuff injury healing?

I will let you know after he removes his arm from Kaepernick's rectum.