ESPN's way too early power rankings...

[boltfan72]

1) Panthers
2) Patriots
3) Seahawks
4) Cardinals
5) Broncos
6) Steelers
7) Packers
8) Bengals
9) Chiefs
10) Vikings

It's almost as if ESPN won't even acknowledge that Manning had his worst year ever and his retirement may only help the Broncos. I think I've clicked on my last power rankings. Whenever they cause me to argue that a team I hate should be higher, I just have to walk away.

NFL Power Rankings: Way-too-early 2016 edition

 

[night]

Offseason power rankings are pointless and they'll probably change 100 times before the season starts.

 

[flyerhawk]

Meh. I don't see the big deal. The Broncos have to get Von Miller and Osweiler signed. They had a great run but it is hard to see them consistently win with their offense being as anemic as it was this year.

You could make an argument for any of those top 5 teams being the favorite right now which means nothing anyway.

 

[GNG]

Meh. I don't see the big deal. The Broncos have to get Von Miller and Osweiler signed. They had a great run but it is hard to see them consistently win with their offense being as anemic as it was this year.

You could make an argument for any of those top 5 teams being the favorite right now which means nothing anyway.

They'll put the franchise tag on Miller and extend Osweiler's contract.

 

[boltfan72]

They'll put the franchise tag on Miller and extend Osweiler's contract.

I don't think it's that easy. I'm not sure Miller agrees to play under the tag. I think he's earned a contract.

 

[flyerhawk]

They'll put the franchise tag on Miller and extend Osweiler's contract.

Most likely. Still going to cost money.

 

[SonnyCID]

They'll put the franchise tag on Miller and extend Osweiler's contract.

They might tag him to ensure he doesn't visit with other teams. But he'll have a long term deal before training camp.

 

[night]

They'll put the franchise tag on Miller and extend Osweiler's contract.

If you're the Broncos front office you have to lock up Miller in a long-term contract.

 

[GNG]

If you're the Broncos front office you have to lock up Miller in a long-term contract.

They will after they put the franchise tag on him.

 

[SonnyCID]

If you're the Broncos front office you have to lock up Miller in a long-term contract.

Agreed. This is the time to reward guys, not be cheap.

 

[RP-29]

Carolina played the NFC East and AFC South in 2015. They play the NFC West and AFC West in 2016. Methinks #1 is a stretch for 2016.

 

[ducky]

They might tag him to ensure he doesn't visit with other teams. But he'll have a long term deal before training camp.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

He unquestionably deserves to be the largest contract given to a defensive player in the history of the league after this season. Suh's contract guarantees that.

That would be 6 years $125M+ range. AAV = roughly $21M

If Denver tags him the next two season, he would cost $31M. AAV = $16M.

So either Miller has to agree to a contract less than Suh or the Broncos have to agree to overpay him based on what they could get by just tagging him the next couple of years. It is those types of situations that lead to players playing a year under the tag because either the agent has to give in or the team does.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Seahawks at 3, LMAO. C'mon ESPN, they should be 14 for sure.

 

[Manster7588]

1) Panthers
2) Patriots
3) Seahawks
4) Cardinals
5) Broncos
6) Steelers
7) Packers
8) Bengals
9) Chiefs
10) Vikings

It's almost as if ESPN won't even acknowledge that Manning had his worst year ever and his retirement may only help the Broncos. I think I've clicked on my last power rankings. Whenever they cause me to argue that a team I hate should be higher, I just have to walk away.

NFL Power Rankings: Way-too-early 2016 edition

The books have Denver at #7 odds to win again. NE, Pitt, and Seattle are on top.

New England, Pittsburgh, Seattle SB 51 favorites

 

[Fountain City Blues]

Probably fair. While Denver's offense has been anemic at times with or without Manning, they did win the SB.

 

[PatsFan2003]

1) Panthers
2) Patriots
3) Seahawks
4) Cardinals
5) Broncos
6) Steelers
7) Packers
8) Bengals
9) Chiefs
10) Vikings

It's almost as if ESPN won't even acknowledge that Manning had his worst year ever and his retirement may only help the Broncos. I think I've clicked on my last power rankings. Whenever they cause me to argue that a team I hate should be higher, I just have to walk away.

NFL Power Rankings: Way-too-early 2016 edition

Do remember that Osweller was replaced by a sub-par Manning.

Their offense was pretty anemic.

But Power Ranking are nonsense at his point. ESPN acknowledges it too, but people like to read them.

 

[eaglesnut]

Broncos still getting no respect.

I watched zero ESPN all season, won my important fantasy football leagues and enjoyed the year completely. ESPN is an insignificant parasite attached to a great professional game.

 

[cdumler7]

About what I expected for the Broncos. They do have a lot of question marks moving forward. As another poster said though that not having Manning on the team could actually be a blessing not a curse moving forward. They also get back some starters on the OL that was so terrible all year long and the guys who did start were first year players for the most part so should have a better OL this next year. Still way too early to be thinking too much into Power Rankings. Rosters turn over way too much from year to year to know what these teams will look like come September.

 

[Tharvot]

the browns will be better

 

[Clayton]

1. Broncos
2. Patriots
3. Panthers
4. Seahawks
5. Cardinals
6. Bengals
7. Chiefs
8. Packers
9. Steelers
10. This could be anyone.