Sporting News Weekly has us third

[baja]

Sporting News Weekly has us finishing third (9-7)in the AFC West behind SD (10-6) and Chiefs (9-7)

Rates;

QBs @ B, Running backs @ B, Receivers @ B O line @ B

D line @ C, Linebackers A, D backs @ B

Special teams @ B (before trade for Sourpuss)

Mag also predicts Washington will finish last in their division @ 5 - 11

[wabbit]

It's always enjoyable to watch TSN continue it's long tradition of dart-board prediction theory.

Didn't they have KC firmly entrenched as Division Kings in '04, with San Diego burrowing even deeper into their 4th place pit.

Lest we forget, their brilliant analysis of the draft had Cal QB Aaron Rodgers going first, Alex Smith going 16th & as far as I can tell...not one correct selection

Best bet...well, best MONEY bet would be the pick the exact opposite...helloooo Oakland

[baja]

They put the Raiders at 6 and 10

[wabbit]

...which may not be far off, depending on whether or not Kerry Collins finds a favorite pub within walking distance to Oakland-Alameda.

[watermock]

All of a sudden we are washed up because we let Hayward and Kennedy go? What a laugher.

Our DL gets Pryce back, and the Browncos, a couple will pan out, and we get Dorsett Davis back, we didn't release him, we gave him a tender. That's 6 players right there we didn't have, along with Luther Ellis. That's 7 we didn't have.

Q and Anderson are both back, TaterTot isn't a rookie anymore and appears healthy, and we drafted MoC. Again, they seem to think Droughns wasn't our backup fullback?

We re-signed our two starting guards, the entire line is intact, and got two more guards and a tackle free agency.

At TE, Alexander is a fine TE, if healthy, Putz got redone...House can still be used on the goalline or at Tackle.

I doubt Plummer is going to throw as many picks, and he's in his third year.

"The Plan" looked like it was going to a disaster, but we pulled it off nicely, and also will probably pick up a great 1st rounder next year, plus our own. If Portis goes down in Washington, we will be picking in the top 5.

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by wabbit

It's always enjoyable to watch TSN continue it's long tradition of dart-board prediction theory.

Didn't they have KC firmly entrenched as Division Kings in '04, with San Diego burrowing even deeper into their 4th place pit.

Well, Rabbit I think pretty much every publication had the Chefs first with the Chargers in the basement. That's hardly a reason to take a shot at TSN.

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Well, Rabbit I think pretty much every publication had the Chefs first with the Chargers in the basement. That's hardly a reason to take a shot at TSN.

I've worked with TSN over the years...most recently in the pre-season last year, and I do believe their editors & writing staff are excellent...even among the best contributing writers from each city.

It's just those darned prediction editions.

They have traditionally been poor on specifics, and this particular edition placing Denver third in the division is also two things it simply cannot be; badly out of date & knee-jerk in it's analysis.

Perhaps that's the price to pay for being first to get the mag out, but it looks pretty silly a short time after.

[Evenrude]

I have a subscription to TSN (actually it was a freebie from fatwallet.com).

The mag is excellent in some areas but pretty poor with their predictions.

Besides, Denver has historically done better when projected lower.

[chrisp]

Asolutley! The last few years there have been too many keen-eyed hacks sitting in the periphery, quietly predicting we were dark horses for the superbowl. I am totally, 100% OK with the whole world's media wrtiing us off.

Remember when we won the superbowl and everybody wrote us off as one-hit-wonders? The packers were re-installed as the bookies favorite for next season virtually the next morning. Then we went and very nearly had an unbeaten season the following year while the packers began a slow slide into mediochrity....

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by wabbit

I've worked with TSN over the years...most recently in the pre-season last year, and I do believe their editors & writing staff are excellent...even among the best contributing writers from each city.

It's just those darned prediction editions.

They have traditionally been poor on specifics, and this particular edition placing Denver third in the division is also two things it simply cannot be; badly out of date & knee-jerk in it's analysis.

Perhaps that's the price to pay for being first to get the mag out, but it looks pretty silly a short time after.

The best sports writer and prognasticator in the country, that I have seen, is a guy for the Dallas Morning News. He writes some great stuff he is really on, on his predictions too. Gouslin(sp) is his name. I think all these magazines that come out early are just pissing in the wind.

[Beantown Bronco]

I haven't seen the article, but how can we place 3rd out of 4 with roughly a B average in all areas? Do KC and SD really average out to be As in their book?

[sirhcyennek81]

Not exactly shocked about them saying we finish third. Has not happened since 1999, but why be factual? Broncos will do fine, and will suprise.

[bronco militia]

Kyla Cole

good god!!

boioioing!

do an image search for Ms. Cole and you won't be dissappointed!!

[Ballhawk]

9-7, 9-7, 10-6 looks like all they predicted was a dogfight for the AFC West. They obviously were not too impressed by the Faid pick ups of Moss and Jordan lol