Thread: Peter King: Early Power Rankings

"Marrdro" wrote:

Not of a fan of SI anymore and I sure the heck don't agree with King on alot of things but that was a pretty decent read.
Thanks for the read.

LOL.
He's an idiot - until he writes something nice about my team - then he's a genius!

=Z=

"ThorSPL" wrote:

Plus half the guarantees are protected by the way the CBA allows teams to recover certain bonuses.....

No, that's wrong.

=Z=

"Overlord" wrote:
[quote]
"midgensa" wrote:

"Overlord" wrote:

As much as I like hearing good things about the Vikes, I thought I should put this in perspective: King's rankings from last summer.

Here are some highlights:

-Of his top 12 teams, 7 did not make the playoffs.
-This on Atlanta, who he had at 20 (1 spot ahead of the Giants):
"Peter_King]<br" wrote:

-His bottom four teams were Tampa Bay, Arizona, Minnesota, and Cleveland.
Their records were 9-7, 8-8, 8-8, and 10-6, respectively, with two of the teams making the playoffs.

In other words, the whole thing is obviously a bunch of bad guesses.
I'd be willing to bet that this time next year his rankings will look a lot more like the standings from 2007 than from 2008.

Oops. Only one of those teams (Tampa Bay) made the playoffs.

Ahh... you are correct sir.
Whoops.

I think I got the records right though.
Hopefully.

And the point still stands!

Yeah, LOL, just goes to show you how wrong the prognosicators can be. While I respect King, he had a lot of teams ahead of Miami. It's fairly easy to pick Indy and NE at the top, but teams can make drastic turnarounds in one year and make you look foolish. But hey, they're like weathermen in that they never have to be right to keep their jobs.

20. Atlanta: A retooling year, but they've got the right guy to retool. Bobby Petrino is a really good coach, a tough and smart football guy who I believe won't let the Michael Vick circus overwhelm his team.

I would say he missed on this one big time!

"Zeus" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

Not of a fan of SI anymore and I sure the heck don't agree with King on alot of things but that was a pretty decent read.
Thanks for the read.

LOL.
He's an idiot - until he writes something nice about my team - then he's a genius!

=Z=

You're safer to just go with everyone being an idiot.
You are correct more often than not.

"Prophet" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

Not of a fan of SI anymore and I sure the heck don't agree with King on alot of things but that was a pretty decent read.
Thanks for the read.

LOL.
He's an idiot - until he writes something nice about my team - then he's a genius!

You're safer to just go with everyone being an idiot.
You are correct more often than not.

GOD I wish Webby would hurry up and grant you and I the power to give the Blue Dot of Idiocy!

=Z=

This is not good. Everytime we get hyped up, it just seems we fall flat. For example, when everyone was touting Super Bowl after the moss trade...... and then..... 9-7 season (no playoffs right?)

"Prophet" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

Not of a fan of SI anymore and I sure the heck don't agree with King on alot of things but that was a pretty decent read.
Thanks for the read.

LOL.
He's an idiot - until he writes something nice about my team - then he's a genius!

=Z=

You're safer to just go with everyone being an idiot.
You are correct more often than not.

LOL...how sadly, yet humorously, true! ;D

"VikingMike" wrote:
[quote]
"Overlord" wrote:

"midgensa" wrote:

"Overlord" wrote:

As much as I like hearing good things about the Vikes, I thought I should put this in perspective: King's rankings from last summer.

Here are some highlights:

-Of his top 12 teams, 7 did not make the playoffs.
-This on Atlanta, who he had at 20 (1 spot ahead of the Giants):
"Peter_King]<br" wrote:

-His bottom four teams were Tampa Bay, Arizona, Minnesota, and Cleveland.
Their records were 9-7, 8-8, 8-8, and 10-6, respectively, with two of the teams making the playoffs.

In other words, the whole thing is obviously a bunch of bad guesses.
I'd be willing to bet that this time next year his rankings will look a lot more like the standings from 2007 than from 2008.

Oops. Only one of those teams (Tampa Bay) made the playoffs.

Ahh... you are correct sir.
Whoops.

I think I got the records right though.
Hopefully.

And the point still stands!

Yeah, LOL, just goes to show you how wrong the prognosicators can be. While I respect King, he had a lot of teams ahead of Miami. It's fairly easy to pick Indy and NE at the top, but teams can make drastic turnarounds in one year and make you look foolish. But hey, they're like weathermen in that they never have to be right to keep their jobs.

20. Atlanta: A retooling year, but they've got the right guy to retool. Bobby Petrino is a really good coach, a tough and smart football guy who I believe won't let the Michael Vick circus overwhelm his team.

I would say he missed on this one big time!

Well it just shows the permutation from year to year in the NFL more then anything.
I doubt King's off-season rankings are any worse at predicting season end ranking then any other sports writer.
At least he does it without being obnoxious.

I don't think most fans even really know what a power ranking means anyways.
Does it meen who is gonna have the best ranking in the standing at years end?
Who currently has the best ranking in the standings? Who has the best chance to win the title? Who is currently playing the strongest? People just know its good to be at the top.

What I am most suprised with is how low the FootballGiants are.
Usually superbowl contenders remain the top unless theres a strong reason otherwise.
I remember it took forever for the Bears to budge on most writers rankings after a Superbowl presence.
What happened to the whole D-Lines win games thing?

I think King is actually a pretty good writer.
Hes one of the guys that actually gets off his butt and goes to training camps.
He aint no Prisco or Tom Powers, thats for sure.
Those guys are sports journalism Gods.

"Zeus" wrote:

"ThorSPL" wrote:

Plus half the guarantees are protected by the way the CBA allows teams to recover certain bonuses.....

No, that's wrong.

=Z=

I thought I remembered reading something where courts have ruled one type of bonus was something that teams were successfully able to retrieve while another one they couldn't.... I'd swear I read something like that in the Allen thread; but there is NO WAY IN HELL I'm going back through it.. oh well.

"ThorSPL" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"ThorSPL" wrote:

Plus half the guarantees are protected by the way the CBA allows teams to recover certain bonuses.....

No, that's wrong.

I thought I remembered reading something where courts have ruled one type of bonus was something that teams were successfully able to retrieve while another one they couldn't.... I'd swear I read something like that in the Allen thread; but there is NO WAY IN HELL I'm going back through it.. oh well.

With Allen's contract, the Vikings have staggered the $31 million guaranteed over the first 3 or 4 seasons.
The first chunk ($16 million) was a signing bonus and is already in Allen's pocket.
The rest of the $15 million is in ROSTER bonuses for 2009, 2010 and 2011 (I believe - might only be 2009 & 2010).
So, if Allen gets in trouble and the Vikings CUT/RELEASE him prior to the day when roster bonuses kick in, they are off-the-hook for those.

As far as I know, that's the only protection in this contract.
The current CBA does NOT allow for recovering guaranteed money for conduct.

=Z=