That's my bad then. We agree there--the signings were meh (and the recent signings make me wonder about Nabers knee)...
Here is Walder's Power Index:
View attachment 14997
I heard Walder too, and he makes good points, but I cannot look at some of the rosters and ask how they can put them so high--primarily Green Bay. Jacobs is nearing being washed, Doubs is gone, Kraft is good, but coming off a major knee injury, Watson is basically a rich-man's LMC, but can't stay healthy. They lost Halfley. LaFleur is on a hot seat. They've been mediocre three of the last 4 years. I think there are a lot of questions around that team. They're ranked #6.
I could see the Niners falling off too--most of their primary offensive players are older than dirt and already injury prone: CMC is really worrisome if I am a 9ers fan. He's 30, has a long injury list, coming off an astronomical carries and touches. Also, Williams, Kittle, and they added Evans who are all mid-to-upper 30s now and coming off injury plagued seasons. None of their younger talent really thrills me.
The Bears would not surprise me if they ended up with 6 wins.
The Vikings are lead by two poor QBs (but at least the have great receivers amirite? 🤣), had a poor draft, can't stop the run (I think this is one of the major reasons they moved on from Kingsbury--he completely abandoned the run against them), but the rest of the defense should be good.
The Bucs went 8-9 in the shittiest division in the history of sports.
Cowboys are getting way too much pre-season love for an incoming Bad Dak year; I saw someone posted a tweet showing he and Caleb were the luckiest QBs when it comes to INTs. That sort of metric almost always regresses:
View attachment 14998
Yeah, and Finlay recently did a segment asking whether the national media is sleeping on this team. Sheehan has made a similar point from a different angle, questioning why Washington isn't getting the same injury-related benefit of the doubt that other teams get.
Take Cincinnati as an example. Their disappointing season is largely written off because Joe Burrow got hurt, and now the expectation is they'll come back with a vengeance. So why doesn't Washington get similar consideration when Jayden missed significant time? Of the local media personalities, Sheehan is probably closest to where I land on this team: they're good, they're a playoff-caliber roster, but they're still one legitimate weapon away from being a real threat. And he's hardly comfortable with the idea of them standing pat.
I think the national media is overlooking a couple of major things:
A. Jayden's absence mattered—a lot.
This team is dramatically different when he's on the field. He's not a player with a long injury history, so I don't view last season as some new normal. Beyond that, when he did play, the supporting cast wasn't exactly helping him. The receiving corps was thin, and the offensive line got off to a rough start before settling in as the season progressed.
B. This defense has a chance to be legitimately good.
I like what Daronte brings as a coordinator. I like the scheme. And I think the front seven has a chance to be one of the strengths of the team. Nationally, I still think people are viewing this defense through an outdated lens.
That said, there is one area where I think the national media is absolutely right:
The supporting cast, particularly at receiver, is among the weakest in the league.
And no, I don't think the offensive line is so dominant that it completely offsets that issue. Conerly is still developing. Coleman struggled at left guard and appears to be getting another opportunity there. We don't yet know whether Allegretti can be a quality full-time center. The good news is that this isn't some impossible problem to solve.
Add a legitimate veteran weapon—someone like Diggs—and suddenly the entire receiver room makes more sense. All those WR4-type players become quality depth pieces instead of players you're counting on to fill major roles.
I like Dyami Brown as a backup. I don't like him as my starting Z receiver. Same with Burks.
As for the argument that maybe McCaffrey, Lane, or another young receiver breaks out, I get it. But my response is simple: I don't want to spend a potential Super Bowl-caliber season running experiments.
If one of those young players is truly emerging, you'll likely see signs of it in camp. And if it happens, great—you adjust accordingly. New England has done that before by spreading reps around and letting players earn their place. Now it looks like Douglas may be separating himself as their No. 3 option.
But that's exactly my point. If a young receiver forces his way into the lineup, that's a good problem to have. I'd much rather enter the season with too many capable weapons than spend another year hoping one develops quickly enough to fill a role that should have been addressed already.
 }})
