Week 1 Power Rankings

[Cartman]

I know it's pointless since a game hasn't been played yet. But there are rankings, so lets have fun with this.




https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl- ... mpetition/

[RichH55]

The Jets thing is insulting

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

I think the Vikings being ranked 12 with Kirk Cousins as QB is insulting.

[spudbear]

I'm trying to figure out how the Commandos get ranked so high in many other power rankings. Is it just their defense? I like Coach Rivera but he does not have much to work with. The Bears will get to play them as well as 5 other teams between them: Pats, Texans, Lions, Jints and Jets. Let's see how the Bears do against them as they will hopefully step over them into the land of contention.

[dplank]

I'm trying to figure out how the Commandos get ranked so high in many other power rankings. Is it just their defense? I like Coach Rivera but he does not have much to work with. The Bears will get to play them as well as 5 other teams between them: Pats, Texans, Lions, Jints and Jets. Let's see how the Bears do against them as they will hopefully step over them into the land of contention.

Yes it's their defense. Maybe the best DL in the game and a great defensive coach (two actually). They were successful without a functional QB, Wentz doesn't have to be a great player for them to be good he just has to not lose games for them and improve a touch on what they've had.

[artbest01]

The Packers and Saints seem to be overrated - to me anyway. I know Green Bay's defense is good, but their offense, while always potent because of Rodgers, won't be quite the same without Adams. The Saints do not have a franchise QB - that should make a difference.

As for the Bears, we'll see. The BEST long-term outcome is for Justin Fields to emerge as a legit franchise QB, several young players emerge AND the team still has a top 5 pick.

[o-pus #40 in B major]

I think a top five pick is oxymoronic with a Fields emergence.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Adam Schein's latest article on nfl.com:

9 last-minute predictions for 2022 NFL season

1) The Patriots are going to be bad
...

2) The Bears are going to be worse

As in, the worst. In my mind, the Chicago Bears are already on the clock for the first overall selection in the 2023 NFL Draft.

Look, I love Justin Fields. This has nothing to do with him. Well, actually, it has everything to do with him, in the sense that Chicago has done such a poor job of putting him in a position to succeed. The damage from the Matt Nagy/Ryan Pace era (error) runs deep. Back in June, Pro Football Focus ranked the Bears' offensive line as the second-worst unit in football, and the group's ghastly effort in the preseason did nothing to challenge that notion. Meanwhile, the receiving corps features Darnell Mooney and ... a whole bunch of filler. And the defense, which ranked 22nd in points allowed last season, no longer features Khalil Mack.

For Fields' sake, I hope I'm dead wrong about this team. Otherwise, Chicago is poised to bottom out and severely stymie a promising young prospect at the game's most important position.

Ouch. I hope the Bears shove his prediction where the sun doesn't shine.

[wab]

This narrative about the Bears defense no longer "featuring" Mack is way past the point of getting old and tired. He played 7 games last season.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

This narrative about the Bears defense no longer "featuring" Mack is way past the point of getting old and tired. He played 7 games last season.

He hasn't been good for the last two seasons. Trying to equate a Mack-less Bears to being a poor defense is just silly. We still have Robert Quinn and Roquan Smith. What about them? Good Lord.

[LacertineForest]

I think a top five pick is oxymoronic with a Fields emergence.

Not necessarily - you can still have Fields show he is the goods if the team around him kind of sucks and/or the injuries pile up. For example, In 2020-2021, Deshaun Watson had numbers we'd all be creaming our pants over if Fields put up, but the Texans went 4-12.

[artbest01]

That's, more or less, what I was thinking. Going way back, the 2008 Packers weren't any good - 6-10 I think? - but it was (fairly) obvious that Aaron Rodgers was the guy.

I think a top five pick is oxymoronic with a Fields emergence.

Not necessarily - you can still have Fields show he is the goods if the team around him kind of sucks and/or the injuries pile up. For example, In 2020-2021, Deshaun Watson had numbers we'd all be creaming our pants over if Fields put up, but the Texans went 4-12.

[RichH55]

That's, more or less, what I was thinking. Going way back, the 2008 Packers weren't any good - 6-10 I think? - but it was (fairly) obvious that Aaron Rodgers was the guy.

Not necessarily - you can still have Fields show he is the goods if the team around him kind of sucks and/or the injuries pile up. For example, In 2020-2021, Deshaun Watson had numbers we'd all be creaming our pants over if Fields put up, but the Texans went 4-12.

Packers lost a lot of close games that year and it was Rodgers first year as starter

Texans weren’t even top 20 in points playing a super easy schedule. And actually we’re outscored by the bears until like week 16 that year. Even taking out the myriad sexual assaults by Watson. That isn’t a year you actually want

[o-pus #40 in B major]

Given the possibilities, my own preference is that Fields's successful emergence this season will preclude a top five pick next year.

[RichH55]

Given the possibilities, my own preference is that Fields's successful emergence this season will preclude a top five pick next year.

There at ways to
Guild that lily

A missd fg here. Random non fields fumble there Questionable personal foul on a rookie defensive player.

Best case is a legit step forward by fields and a good pick nonetheless

[RichH55]

And sorry pus. The dazz dream
Is dead. Need to change your quote

[o-pus #40 in B major]

And sorry pus. The dazz dream
Is dead. Need to change your quote

What quote?

[Shadow]

This narrative about the Bears defense no longer "featuring" Mack is way past the point of getting old and tired. He played 7 games last season.

He hasn't been good for the last two seasons. Trying to equate a Mack-less Bears to being a poor defense is just silly. We still have Robert Quinn and Roquan Smith. What about them? Good Lord.

^^^^^^
This!
Have they all forgotten the guy that set the new Franchise record for sacks is still on the team?
Mack was hardly an impact because he has been hurt for at least the last 2 years. Bears were right in trading him now, get something for a guy that isn't avalable to contribute on the field on a regular basis!

I will admit I was sceptical of the Quinn pick up originally, his track record over his career was up and down. He changed my mind last season with outstanding play.

Bears are not going to the Super Bowl but they are not going to be one of the worst in the league either.

[IE]

He hasn't been good for the last two seasons. Trying to equate a Mack-less Bears to being a poor defense is just silly. We still have Robert Quinn and Roquan Smith. What about them? Good Lord.

^^^^^^
This!
Have they all forgotten the guy that set the new Franchise record for sacks is still on the team?
Mack was hardly an impact because he has been hurt for at least the last 2 years. Bears were right in trading him now, get something for a guy that isn't avalable to contribute on the field on a regular basis!

I will admit I was skeptical of the Quinn pick up originally, his track record over his career was up and down. He changed my mind last season with outstanding play.

Bears are not going to the Super Bowl but they are not going to be one of the worst in the league either.

Poles kept the guys that could still play, and represented value over average. And brought in guys who have potential to deliver value over average more than the downward-slope guys they let go. But the narrative and talking heads need to name names - so they talk about Hicks and Trevathan and Nichols as if the Bears lost those players in their prime (if Nichols ever had a prime).

ARob gets the same treatment, as a "big loss" to the Bears. And man he was invisible last night - pretty funny after Michael Irvin called him the "space eater" all week and predicted he'd regain his peak form and be a force out there on the other side of Kupp. The Bills shut him down with young no-name corners - not names or superstars. But they're not "rebuilding" (a euphemism for having new GM and coaches) so the the talk about the young players is positive and optimistic, versus the story on the Bears who apparently have "nothing" in JJ, Gordon, Brisker and several other young guys they like.

Mack is still good - but in the context of what he is paid and what that means to the rest of the team and financial operations, he had to go. He still gets a lot of attention and double-teamed - so that is valuable. But his stats have gone down steadily since he signed with the Bears - he literally never had a season with the Bears like he had in the few before he came over from the Raider. Right now it looks like the trade of Mack for Brisker and $$ was a winner. But we'll see. I'm dying to see Brisker over the next couple of weeks - and hope he makes a name for himself with some statement plays against Lance and Rodgers.

[Cartman]

Adam Schein's latest article on nfl.com:

9 last-minute predictions for 2022 NFL season

1) The Patriots are going to be bad
...

2) The Bears are going to be worse

As in, the worst. In my mind, the Chicago Bears are already on the clock for the first overall selection in the 2023 NFL Draft.

Look, I love Justin Fields. This has nothing to do with him. Well, actually, it has everything to do with him, in the sense that Chicago has done such a poor job of putting him in a position to succeed. The damage from the Matt Nagy/Ryan Pace era (error) runs deep. Back in June, Pro Football Focus ranked the Bears' offensive line as the second-worst unit in football, and the group's ghastly effort in the preseason did nothing to challenge that notion. Meanwhile, the receiving corps features Darnell Mooney and ... a whole bunch of filler. And the defense, which ranked 22nd in points allowed last season, no longer features Khalil Mack.

For Fields' sake, I hope I'm dead wrong about this team. Otherwise, Chicago is poised to bottom out and severely stymie a promising young prospect at the game's most important position.

Ouch. I hope the Bears shove his prediction where the sun doesn't shine.

Here's the thing, I think he's 100% right. I've said that throughout the off season. To ignore the facts is simply seeing the team through navy blue and orange colored glasses. I'm astonished they've let their offensive line stay in such shitty shape. They drafted their offensive lineman late in the draft and picked up retreads and cast-offs in free agency. Fields already got hurt once last year behind the line. And the line is even worse this year. I truly hope he doesn't get hurt again. But I foresee him running for his life more often than not. Until the Bears show something different on the field, I'm of the belief they are one of the worst (if not the absolute worse) team in the NFL this year.

[dplank]

I’m wondering how the Saints are ranked to high.

[IE]

Adam Schein's latest article on nfl.com:



Ouch. I hope the Bears shove his prediction where the sun doesn't shine.

Here's the thing, I think he's 100% right. I've said that throughout the off season. To ignore the facts is simply seeing the team through navy blue and orange colored glasses. I'm astonished they've let their offensive line stay in such shitty shape. They drafted their offensive lineman late in the draft and picked up retreads and cast-offs in free agency. Fields already got hurt once last year behind the line. And the line is even worse this year. I truly hope he doesn't get hurt again. But I foresee him running for his life more often than not. Until the Bears show something different on the field, I'm of the belief they are one of the worst (if not the absolute worse) team in the NFL this year.

I call BS here. It is a dramatically different line, in an entirely new system, with a new and very different play-caller - who you have never seen call a game. How can you claim they "stayed" in any shape? That's just not true at all. You don't know if they're worse. You don't!

There are inexperienced players that turn out really good, and experienced players who go out there every year and are not really very good at all. It isn't "ignoring facts" to recognize some young and new promising players in new spots (Jones, Jenk, Patrick) and others being developed by a new highly reputed OL coach. It isnt' "ignoring facts" to be excited about having THREE fullbackl/Hback who will be hoeing the row for Monty and helping protect the crown jewel.

It is absolute nonsense for you to claim what you claim here with zero basis and with YOU ignoring material developments. It make zero sense to say "they're bad until they prove otherwise". It is absolutely false that all new things introduced are bad. It is just a choice you're making to be cynical, when it is no more intelligent or logical than being optimistic. You're literally choosing to be a bummer to other people. Congrats.

Schein's comments about the Oline performance in the preseason shows he just doesn't know & hasn't really paid attention. There are no "facts" to justify Schein's list other than the material changes they made to get a lot better now have to be tested. That doesn't justify saying they are the worst. I only justifies saying "I don't know - so I'm putting them on the bottom until I do". Which is really what he's doing.

[Cartman]

Here's the thing, I think he's 100% right. I've said that throughout the off season. To ignore the facts is simply seeing the team through navy blue and orange colored glasses. I'm astonished they've let their offensive line stay in such shitty shape. They drafted their offensive lineman late in the draft and picked up retreads and cast-offs in free agency. Fields already got hurt once last year behind the line. And the line is even worse this year. I truly hope he doesn't get hurt again. But I foresee him running for his life more often than not. Until the Bears show something different on the field, I'm of the belief they are one of the worst (if not the absolute worse) team in the NFL this year.

I call BS here. It is a dramatically different line, in an entirely new system, with a new and very different play-caller - who you have never seen call a game. How can you claim they "stayed" in any shape? That's just not true at all. You don't know if they're worse. You don't!

There are inexperienced players that turn out really good, and experienced players who go out there every year and are not really very good at all. It isn't "ignoring facts" to recognize some young and new promising players in new spots (Jones, Jenk, Patrick) and others being developed by a new highly reputed OL coach. It isnt' "ignoring facts" to be excited about having THREE fullbackl/Hback who will be hoeing the row for Monty and helping protect the crown jewel.

It is absolute nonsense for you to claim what you claim here with zero basis and with YOU ignoring material developments. It make zero sense to say "they're bad until they prove otherwise". It is absolutely false that all new things introduced are bad. It is just a choice you're making to be cynical, when it is no more intelligent or logical than being optimistic. You're literally choosing to be a bummer to other people. Congrats.

Schein's comments about the Oline performance in the preseason shows he just doesn't know & hasn't really paid attention. There are no "facts" to justify Schein's list other than the material changes they made to get a lot better now have to be tested. That doesn't justify saying they are the worst. I only justifies saying "I don't know - so I'm putting them on the bottom until I do". Which is really what he's doing.

So you're chastising people for making assumptions based on the team's past performance and saying those opinions have no bearing now because the season hasn't been played. And that these players COULD, potentially, turn out to be good. So assumptions are only bad when the assumptions are negative. But if you assumptions are positive, then they're valid. I'll be happy to eat crow if, and that's a huge if, they do better than predicted. But when they don't...and I'm assuming they will suck based on their performance over past 10 season...then you'll just call me a hater. Got it. This is still the same organization who hired Trestman, Fox and Nagy. They're still the same organization that has only had a winning record 7 times out of the last 23 season (i.e., this millennium). To have confidence it their hiring *this time*, based on their track record, is foolish, imo. So flip me off all you like. But until they prove otherwise, they are still one of the worst teams in the NFL. I hope I'm wrong, I truly do. But again, based on the Bears' history, I'm guessing I'm more likely to be right than you are.

[o-pus #40 in B major]

Dammit anyway.

After cartoonman's way too gassy post here, I am in need of a bottle of whiskey - which I'm never going to buy for myself ever again in this lifetime.

So now I gotta call my buddy, who loves the niners, who is always good for a wager, who has fairly good taste in scotch.

This is all due to you, cartoonman. Thanks a bunch - what a pal. You are number one.

[IE]

Newsflash: People can expect the very worst in spite of any mitigating information, if that is their choice. People can think and say what they want. Stunning information.

Also Newsflash: Other people can also (rightfully) provide feedback where they are subjected to have to read cynical/negative bullshit on a site that they otherwise enjoy. Should not come as a surprise to the people who are deliberately negative to get like feedback. I'm surprised it isn't welcome in their world full of horrors.

Have a good day.

[wab]

I call BS here. It is a dramatically different line, in an entirely new system, with a new and very different play-caller - who you have never seen call a game. How can you claim they "stayed" in any shape? That's just not true at all. You don't know if they're worse. You don't!

There are inexperienced players that turn out really good, and experienced players who go out there every year and are not really very good at all. It isn't "ignoring facts" to recognize some young and new promising players in new spots (Jones, Jenk, Patrick) and others being developed by a new highly reputed OL coach. It isnt' "ignoring facts" to be excited about having THREE fullbackl/Hback who will be hoeing the row for Monty and helping protect the crown jewel.

It is absolute nonsense for you to claim what you claim here with zero basis and with YOU ignoring material developments. It make zero sense to say "they're bad until they prove otherwise". It is absolutely false that all new things introduced are bad. It is just a choice you're making to be cynical, when it is no more intelligent or logical than being optimistic. You're literally choosing to be a bummer to other people. Congrats.

Schein's comments about the Oline performance in the preseason shows he just doesn't know & hasn't really paid attention. There are no "facts" to justify Schein's list other than the material changes they made to get a lot better now have to be tested. That doesn't justify saying they are the worst. I only justifies saying "I don't know - so I'm putting them on the bottom until I do". Which is really what he's doing.

So you're chastising people for making assumptions based on the team's past performance and saying those opinions have no bearing now because the season hasn't been played. And that these players COULD, potentially, turn out to be good. So assumptions are only bad when the assumptions are negative. But if you assumptions are positive, then they're valid. I'll be happy to eat crow if, and that's a huge if, they do better than predicted. But when they don't...and I'm assuming they will suck based on their performance over past 10 season...then you'll just call me a hater. Got it. This is still the same organization who hired Trestman, Fox and Nagy. They're still the same organization that has only had a winning record 7 times out of the last 23 season (i.e., this millennium). To have confidence it their hiring *this time*, based on their track record, is foolish, imo. So flip me off all you like. But until they prove otherwise, they are still one of the worst teams in the NFL. I hope I'm wrong, I truly do. But again, based on the Bears' history, I'm guessing I'm more likely to be right than you are.

I'm not trying to add fuel to the fire here, but I find it genuinely interesting that people can remain fans of a team that bring them so much disappointment year in and year out.

[Moriarty]

I'm not trying to add fuel to the fire here, but I find it genuinely interesting that people can remain fans of a team that bring them so much disappointment year in and year out.

Doesn't that incorporate nearly everyone?

And for that matter, it seems like those who go in with the highest hopes, logically, ought to be the ones most disappointed.


But the True Believers always manage to convince themselves "next year is the year!".

[thunderspirit]

I'm not trying to add fuel to the fire here, but I find it genuinely interesting that people can remain fans of a team that bring them so much disappointment year in and year out.

Doesn't that incorporate nearly everyone?

And for that matter, it seems like those who go in with the highest hopes, logically, ought to be the ones most disappointed.


But the True Believers always manage to convince themselves "next year is the year!".

Being a lifelong Cub fan prepared me well for wait til next year.

[IE]

Its like the Debbie Downer bit, but in the bit she was supposed to be oblivious and that was what made it funny. It wouldn't have been funny or fun at all if she KNEW she was a downer and just simply enjoyed ruining everyone else's time. And on top of it scolded other people for not agreeing with her relentless negativity.

Every single person here who is a fan and has been around for a minute knows there is potential disappointment when you pick a football team to cheer for. Some folks apparently just can't handle the personal risk of disappointment unless they can finesse it into some sort of bizarre self-satisfaction with having forecasted misfortune if their team loses. It's quite morbid.

Moriarty - your characterization is off, I think. It isn't delusion about next year. It is just an ability to gracefully accept a bad outcome, own the loss & not fall victim to reverse gambler's fallacy (we lost before, we're likely to lose again). It is, indeed, illogical to assume that once bad; always bad. It isn't true for many teams. And in fact it REALLY isn't true or logical for Bear fans who have seen a SB berth this century (which, to older people like myself, wasn't too long ago).

[Moriarty]

Moriarty - your characterization is off, I think. It isn't delusion about next year.

I would disagree strongly.


There's a large contingent who

• Deludes themselves about the current year
• Then it doesn't come true
• Instead of getting too down - or doing any self-reflection and adjusting the tint on their Homer Glasses - they move on to deluding themselves about next year
• Rinse and repeat
• And occasionally you get the "broken clock is right twice a day" effect, where the team will exceed reasonable expectations once in a while, which they then use to congratulate themselves on 'being more perceptive than the masses' and justify approaching things the same way as always.

As UOK or wab(?) said recently "that's what fanbases do".
Why frustrates and mystifies me, though.
I can't relate to needing to do that or feeling like it somehow feels better at all.