PDA

View Full Version : Pat Kirwan's Power teams for 2013: Five in the best position to dominate


Bronco Rob
02-08-2013, 08:30 AM
I looked at all 32 teams and arrived at the top five in the best shape to go forward in 2013 from a football and business sense.

The criteria I used included:

• How good was the team in 2012?

• How many returning starters are already under contract?

• Is there a franchise quarterback under contract?

• How much salary cap space do they have at this point?

• Are the head coach and coordinators back for another season?

• How many significant players have five or less years of experience?

• How many veterans needed to be released for salary cap, age or injury reasons?

• Do they have a full complement of draft picks?

Taking a look at teams with these eight criteria as the barometer can put into perspective how realistic it is for a franchise to be ready for the 2013 season.

Here are my top five franchises poised to make a run in 2013 because they have the personnel, money and infrastructure in place. Keep in mind salary cap space fluctuates almost on a daily basis.


1. Seattle: The Seahawks won 11 games in 2012, return 20 starters and found their franchise QB in Russell Wilson. They also have close to $18 million in salary cap space. There are 15 significant players with five or less years of experience and they have eight draft picks. Seattle did lose its defensive coordinator to the Jaguars, but Pete Carroll is a defensive-minded coach. This team is in a great situation to start extending solid young players on their roster. GM John Schneider is an aggressive deal maker, and a few trades could bring the Seahawks even more draft picks or players to one of the youngest teams in the NFL.

2. San Francisco: The 49ers won 11 games in 2012 and almost won the Super Bowl. They return 19 starters, found their franchise QB in Colin Kaepernick but have only have $4 million to $5 million in salary cap space. They have nine significant players with five or fewer years of experience and have 11 draft picks in 2013. With extra picks in Rounds 3, 5, 6, 7, GM Trent Balke can move up if he sees players of value. It would be hard to have 11 draft picks make this roster in 2013, but that's a good problem to have coming off a Super Bowl run. If Alex Smith is traded, the Niners will have even more picks and cap space to work with this spring.

3. New England: The Patriots won 12 games in 2012. They have 19 returning starters, Tom Brady is under contract and they have about $18 million in cap space. They have 14 significant players with five or fewer years of experience but only five draft picks at this point. Bill Belichick is always capable of creating more draft picks by moving down in rounds. The Patriots will find bargain veterans in the post-draft period of free agency and have the money to sign as many as they want.

4. Green Bay: The Packers won 11 games in 2012, have 20 returning starters, Aaron Rodgers is still under contract and they have a modest $7 million in salary cap space. They have 12 significant players with five or fewer years of experience and seven draft picks.

5. Denver: The Broncos won 13 games in 2012, return 18 starters, Peyton Manning is under contract and they have close to $17 million in cap space. They have 10 significant players with five or fewer years of experience and all seven draft picks. Denver did lose its offensive coordinator to San Diego, but Manning acts like the coordinator anyway.



http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/21663914/power-teams-for-2013-five-in-the-best-position-to-dominate

ZONA
02-08-2013, 10:37 AM
Wow, shunning out the world champs....ouch. I would agree with that list of their top 5. I'd probably bet $5000 the next superbowl winner will be one of those 5.

I think you could throw in the next 5 (Atlanta, Baltimore, Cincinnati, NYG, Pittsburgh) as a longer shot to win it all but still could be in the mix if everything falls right for them, such as it did for the Rat****s.

DenverDynamite
02-08-2013, 11:33 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if Baltimore misses the playoffs next year.

ColoradoDarin
02-08-2013, 12:36 PM
Seattle can trade Flynn for a high pick too

go_broncos
02-08-2013, 12:52 PM
Denver will not win SB with Fox coaching + Manning as QB

Doggcow
02-08-2013, 01:19 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if Baltimore misses the playoffs next year.

Yeah they ****ed cap wise. They got lucky they snagged this one. They're done for a while.

Rabb
02-08-2013, 01:20 PM
Denver will not win SB with Fox coaching + Manning as QB

you are such a breath of fresh air

Archer81
02-08-2013, 01:22 PM
Denver will not win SB with Fox coaching + Manning as QB


You just guaranteed it will happen. Good on ya, go_denethor!

:Broncos:

enjolras
02-08-2013, 01:51 PM
Yeah they ****ed cap wise. They got lucky they snagged this one. They're done for a while.

They just lost their best player (by a big margin) as well. That defense that we faced in week 12? That's their new normal.

g6matty
02-08-2013, 04:12 PM
Denver will not win SB with Fox coaching + Manning as QB

lonestar, is that you ?

Traveler
02-08-2013, 06:11 PM
I looked at all 32 teams and arrived at the top five in the best shape to go forward in 2013 from a football and business sense.

The criteria I used included:

How good was the team in 2012?

How many returning starters are already under contract?

Is there a franchise quarterback under contract?

How much salary cap space do they have at this point?

Are the head coach and coordinators back for another season?

How many significant players have five or less years of experience?

How many veterans needed to be released for salary cap, age or injury reasons?

Do they have a full complement of draft picks?

Taking a look at teams with these eight criteria as the barometer can put into perspective how realistic it is for a franchise to be ready for the 2013 season.

Here are my top five franchises poised to make a run in 2013 because they have the personnel, money and infrastructure in place. Keep in mind salary cap space fluctuates almost on a daily basis.


5. Denver: The Broncos won 13 games in 2012, return 18 starters, Peyton Manning is under contract and they have close to $17 million in cap space. They have 10 significant players with five or fewer years of experience and all seven draft picks. Denver did lose its offensive coordinator to San Diego, but Manning acts like the coordinator anyway.



http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/21663914/power-teams-for-2013-five-in-the-best-position-to-dominate

Did we not lose a pick for Bunkley?

Bacchus
02-09-2013, 04:41 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if Baltimore misses the playoffs next year.

Baltimore has some issues with contracts and i think they are going to make a big mistake by giving Flacco $20 million per year.

Bacchus
02-09-2013, 04:42 AM
lonestar, is that you ?

That is No_Broncos. Lonelystar's identical twin sister.

gunns
02-09-2013, 06:09 AM
Wow, shunning out the world champs....ouch. I would agree with that list of their top 5. I'd probably bet $5000 the next superbowl winner will be one of those 5.

I think you could throw in the next 5 (Atlanta, Baltimore, Cincinnati, NYG, Pittsburgh) as a longer shot to win it all but still could be in the mix if everything falls right for them, such as it did for the Rat****s.

I'm not sure you can include Pitt in that mix. They are 13 mil over the cap and getting old. They have numerous starters that are free agents, some backups. Mike Wallace, Max Starks, Keenan Lewis, Will Allen, Larry Foote, Casey Hampton, both backup QB's and this isn't the entire list. While some of these may be nearing the end of their ropes Pitt doesn't have backups that can step into some of those starting roles and will have to add, which will be difficult as far as quality. They could be looking at rebuilding for a couple of years.

Saw another article on this exact same subject. The 5 teams that article listed did not even include the Broncos. I liked that, let's get back to being overlooked.

errand
02-09-2013, 06:52 AM
Denver will not win SB with Fox coaching + Manning as QB

What do you care? You don't like the Broncos anyway....

Tombstone RJ
02-09-2013, 09:30 AM
ok, I'm sorry to be the guy who again complains about the media but Pat Kirwin is a moron. He lists the Broncos at #5 but they arguably have the best overall numbers according to his stats and I'm sorry but he has NO IDEA if Russell Wilson or Colin K. are legit franchise QBs. There's simply not enough data to make this huge assumption.

Pat Kirwin, what a failure you are. Hoisted by your own petard because you are a retard.

Play2win
02-09-2013, 10:31 AM
I think next year's Superbowl will be either: Denver, Greenbay or Seattle.

boltaneer
02-09-2013, 10:43 AM
ok, I'm sorry to be the guy who again complains about the media but Pat Kirwin is a moron. He lists the Broncos at #5 but they arguably have the best overall numbers according to his stats and I'm sorry but he has NO IDEA if Russell Wilson or Colin K. are legit franchise QBs. There's simply not enough data to make this huge assumption.

Pat Kirwin, what a failure you are. Hoisted by your own petard because you are a retard.

How did you come up with that conclusion? Denver does not have the best numbers according to his criteria.

Tombstone RJ
02-09-2013, 01:34 PM
How did you come up with that conclusion? Denver does not have the best numbers according to his criteria.

Denver has some of the "better" numbers, not the best in all categories but very good numbers based on Kirwan's stats. Add that to a truly proven vet QB in Manning who is under contract and this elevates the Broncos above Seattle and the Niners IMHO because Wilson and Colin K. have only had one good season. I think the top two teams, based on Kirwan's criterial are NE and Denver with Seattle and the Niners following due to the QB situation. Sure, Seattle and San Fran appear to have solid QBs who are young, but until they prove it over a few seasons it's just a bit too soon to say these guys are on the same level as 2 HoF QBs. JMHO of course.

Bacchus
02-09-2013, 01:38 PM
ok, I'm sorry to be the guy who again complains about the media but Pat Kirwin is a moron. He lists the Broncos at #5 but they arguably have the best overall numbers according to his stats and I'm sorry but he has NO IDEA if Russell Wilson or Colin K. are legit franchise QBs. There's simply not enough data to make this huge assumption.

Pat Kirwin, what a failure you are. Hoisted by your own petard because you are a retard.

It's a combination of things. Seattle has 15 significant players with five or less years Denver only has 10. SF on the other hand has 11 draft picks compared to Denver's 7. Just because you disagree with him doesn't make HIM the moron.

boltaneer
02-09-2013, 02:02 PM
Denver has some of the "better" numbers, not the best in all categories but very good numbers based on Kirwan's stats. Add that to a truly proven vet QB in Manning who is under contract and this elevates the Broncos above Seattle and the Niners IMHO because Wilson and Colin K. have only had one good season. I think the top two teams, based on Kirwan's criterial are NE and Denver with Seattle and the Niners following due to the QB situation. Sure, Seattle and San Fran appear to have solid QBs who are young, but until they prove it over a few seasons it's just a bit too soon to say these guys are on the same level as 2 HoF QBs. JMHO of course.

I have no problem with your opinion but you're not using Kirwan's criteria, that's all.

Tombstone RJ
02-09-2013, 02:56 PM
I have no problem with your opinion but you're not using Kirwan's criteria, that's all.

Please explain the criteria then.

Mogulseeker
02-09-2013, 02:57 PM
Who are the four starters we are losing?

I figure Bannan and Mays/DJ are gone, maybe Adams - but they're only because we're probably improving at those positions.

Tombstone RJ
02-09-2013, 03:03 PM
It's a combination of things. Seattle has 15 significant players with five or less years Denver only has 10. SF on the other hand has 11 draft picks compared to Denver's 7. Just because you disagree with him doesn't make HIM the moron.

I've acknowledge that the Broncos numbers are not the best in all the categories but the fact that they are strong numbers according to the categories + the fact that they have a proven HoF QB should give lift them above Seattle and the Niners IMHO. Kirwan simply cannot say with any certainty that Wilson and Kaep. are true franchise QBs let alone HoF QBs with just one season under their belts. That's all I'm saying. Simply because Seattle and San Fran have better numbers in a few categories (lets not forget these categories are made up by Kirwan so they are completely subjective IMHO) while NE and Denver and even GB has a proven history with their QBs does not IMHO make the SB favorites. But I concede this is Pat Kirwan's world we are talking about lol.

boltaneer
02-09-2013, 03:35 PM
Please explain the criteria then.

It's in the OP's post:

We don't know how he ranked the QBs or what kind of weighting he used for the different categories, if any. And he didn't mention numbers for the "veterans needed to be released" category.

He talked about this at length on the radio and from what it seemed he put a big emphasis on how many players returning and how many significant players were under 5 years experience.

If you add up the ranks on what is available on the CBS site, here's what you get:

Seahawks: 12
49ers: 14
Patriots: 14
Packers: 16
Broncos: 22

Based on his criteria, the category rankings line up with his overall rankings.

SEAHAWKS:

How good was the team in 2012?

Reached NFC Division playoffs. (3rd)

How many returning starters are already under contract?

- 20 starters returning (1st)

Is there a franchise quarterback under contract?

- Wilson (franchise quarterback). This is opinion here but he believes he is one.

How much salary cap space do they have at this point?

- $18 million cap space (1st)

Are the head coach and coordinators back for another season?

- HC and OC returning. (4th)

How many significant players have five or less years of experience?

- 15 significant players with five or less years of experience (1st)

How many veterans needed to be released for salary cap, age or injury reasons?

Doesn't say.

Do they have a full complement of draft picks?

Eight draft picks. (2nd)


49ERS:

How good was the team in 2012?

Lost Super Bowl (1st)

How many returning starters are already under contract?

19 starters. (3rd)

Is there a franchise quarterback under contract?

- Kaepernick (franchise quarterback). This is opinion here but he believes he is one.

How much salary cap space do they have at this point?

- $4-5 million cap space (5th)

Are the head coach and coordinators back for another season?

- All returning. (1st)

How many significant players have five or less years of experience?

- 9 significant players with five or less years of experience (3rd)

How many veterans needed to be released for salary cap, age or injury reasons?

Doesn't say.

Do they have a full complement of draft picks?

Eleven draft picks. (1st)


PATRIOTS:

How good was the team in 2012?

Reached AFC Championship Game (2nd)

How many returning starters are already under contract?

19 starters. (2nd)

Is there a franchise quarterback under contract?

- Brady

How much salary cap space do they have at this point?

- $18+ million cap space (2nd)

Are the head coach and coordinators back for another season?

- All returning. (1st)

How many significant players have five or less years of experience?

- 14 significant players with five or less years of experience (2nd)

How many veterans needed to be released for salary cap, age or injury reasons?

Doesn't say.

Do they have a full complement of draft picks?

Five draft picks. (5th)


PACKERS

How good was the team in 2012?

Reached NFC Playoffs (4th)

How many returning starters are already under contract?

20 starters. (1st)

Is there a franchise quarterback under contract?

- Rodgers

How much salary cap space do they have at this point?

- $7+ million cap space (4th)

Are the head coach and coordinators back for another season?

- All returning. (1st)

How many significant players have five or less years of experience?

- 12 significant players with five or less years of experience (3rd)

How many veterans needed to be released for salary cap, age or injury reasons?

Doesn't say.

Do they have a full complement of draft picks?

Seven draft picks. (3rd)


BRONCOS

How good was the team in 2012?

Reached AFC Division Playoffs. (3rd)

How many returning starters are already under contract?

18 starters. (4th)

Is there a franchise quarterback under contract?

- Manning

How much salary cap space do they have at this point?

- $17+ million cap space (3rd)

Are the head coach and coordinators back for another season?

- HC and DC returning. (4th)

How many significant players have five or less years of experience?

- 10 significant players with five or less years of experience (5th)

How many veterans needed to be released for salary cap, age or injury reasons?

Doesn't say.

Do they have a full complement of draft picks?

Seven draft picks. (3rd)

Tombstone RJ
02-09-2013, 04:00 PM
lol, ok whatever. You are not following his criteria. I'll give you one example, in the OP Kirwan states the regular season record of the teams, not how far they went in the playoffs. So off the OP the Broncos are #1 because they have the most regular season wins.

But whatever. Like I said, it's a subjective ranking system based on his opinion. I'm taking facts and inserting them into the equation. Fact, Manning and Brady are HoF QBs. Fact, Wilson and Colin K. are 1 year starters.

Bacchus
02-09-2013, 10:25 PM
lol, ok whatever. You are not following his criteria. I'll give you one example, in the OP Kirwan states the regular season record of the teams, not how far they went in the playoffs. So off the OP the Broncos are #1 because they have the most regular season wins.

But whatever. Like I said, it's a subjective ranking system based on his opinion. I'm taking facts and inserting them into the equation. Fact, Manning and Brady are HoF QBs. Fact, Wilson and Colin K. are 1 year starters.

SO he had a whole list of criteria and he is an idiot. You are just looking at QBs:thumbs:

boltaneer
02-09-2013, 11:25 PM
lol, ok whatever. You are not following his criteria. I'll give you one example, in the OP Kirwan states the regular season record of the teams, not how far they went in the playoffs. So off the OP the Broncos are #1 because they have the most regular season wins.

But whatever. Like I said, it's a subjective ranking system based on his opinion. I'm taking facts and inserting them into the equation. Fact, Manning and Brady are HoF QBs. Fact, Wilson and Colin K. are 1 year starters.

It's irrelevant. If you go by the regular season rankings (which he does), that only moves the Broncos up 2 points. They'd still be in 5th place according to his criteria.

As for the QBs, yes, no one knows how he ranked them. Manning would be ranked at least 3rd, probably 2nd. That would push the Broncos up a few more points but not enough to get out of 5th place according to his criteria.

It is what it is.

lonestar
02-10-2013, 12:04 AM
lonestar, is that you ?

Typical crap from a kiddie.

Have nothing intelligent to say? how about debating the guy/gal?

But instead feel like a tough guy with your one liners. Hell you may be even worse than dream.

Btw I happen to like both of the guys in question. Fell like they are the reason we got as far as we did..

To quote an old movie "go away kid, you bother me".

But frankly all you do is emapbarass yourself with juvelinile posts like that.