Peter King rankings: Colts #11 (merge)

[Detectacon]

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/06/01/nfl-power-rankings-peter-king-daughter-wedding/5/

 

His nonsense includes ranking Baltimore at 1, Kansas City at 4, Minnesota at 6, and Philly at 7. 

 

Oh and he ranks the Colts at 11.....

 

I think someone is hitting the apple juice a little hard.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

... according to Peter King.

 

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2015/6/1/8699579/peter-king-doesnt-think-the-indianapolis-colts-are-a-top-ten-team

[Thewholefnshow28]

I do not understand why writers do power rankings.  

 

No matter what you say 31 fanbases will rant on you as to why their team was not higher.  

[Dark Superman]

Baltimore as the #1 team in the AFC.. Maybe.

But to have them as the best team in the NFL is just mind boggling.

[ColtRider]

King puts the Chiefs, Vikings, Eagles and Cardinals before the Colts at #11?

He states in the intro: "let's see how wrong I can be"

Agreed. 100% agreed.

[mattceinicram]

umm...ok

[mattceinicram]

Minnesota in the top 10. I can't 

[southwest1]

King puts the Chiefs, Vikings, Eagles and Cardinals before the Colts at #11?

He states in the intro: "let's see how wrong I can be"

Agreed. 100% agreed.

That is so ridiculous it's beyond words Peter. Is someone spiking your morning coffee? How in the world are Eagles ahead of INDY with Sam Bradford at the helm? Are you freaking kidding me? Also, didn't we beat the Broncos last season? Wow Peter. You have no idea what you're talking about. 

 

Placing Seattle at 2 is extremely generous considering that SB losing teams rarely fare well the following year. I guess I should be grateful that you didn't put Dallas ahead of INDY the last time we played them they kicked our caboose, but Pittsburgh wiped the floor with us & they got ranked at #7 so even your reasoning is flawed. As much as it pains me to say this, Dallas should be higher based on their Playoff success most recently. 

[PeterBowman]

hard for him to see the rest of the league when his head is firmly implanted in Tom Brady's colon.

[Coffeedrinker]

At this point of the season it doesn't really matter and they are fortunate to be in the AFC South so a playoff spot is nearly guaranteed, but when compared to the other 28 teams in the NFL, I don't know if they would be considered a top 10.

[Superman]

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/06/01/nfl-power-rankings-peter-king-daughter-wedding/5/

 

His nonsense includes ranking Baltimore at 1, Kansas City at 4, Minnesota at 6, and Philly at 7. 

 

Oh and he ranks the Colts at 11.....

 

I think someone is hitting the apple juice a little hard.

 

... according to Peter King.

 

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2015/6/1/8699579/peter-king-doesnt-think-the-indianapolis-colts-are-a-top-ten-team

 

FYI: Your threads were merged.

[southwest1]

I 'd put us in Denver's current place spot & how are the Chiefs at 4 when Dwayne Bowe is in Cleveland now since he could catch 1 pass in Kansas for Andy Reid? 

[Superman]

Baltimore as the #1 team in the AFC.. Maybe.

But to have them as the best team in the NFL is just mind boggling.

 

His rationale is even worse: 'I just think Harbaugh will find a way.' Hardly compelling.

 

And the same with New England: 'They'll win 11 games no matter what.' Presumably because of Belichick.

 

And then the Colts: 'I don't know how they'll stop good offenses, and I don't think Pagano knows either.' 

 

Whether I agree with the rankings or not (and I don't, but that's hardly surprising), why not try to make a real argument for your rankings that consists of more than just how much you believe in (or don't believe in) the head coach? 

 

[southwest1]

I keep trying to edit my responses & they disappear. Time for me to scan another thread I guess. "No such topic" is very annoying. 

[COLTS449]

Sounds like this Peter King loser needs to get out of the ally and put the crack pipe down before he completely loses it. Nobody cares what this guy thinks.

[Flash7]

Peter King is entitled to his opinion. I don't agree with them in this case, but for that, I won't call him a bum or anything. I actually enjoy his work more than I do other writers.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I like King.  I get annoyed when his NE bias gets in front of his work though.  And yes, he seems to have it in for Pagano, but likes Arians (and the obvious HC's)

[Warhorse]

"OK, men. Look right here at this chalkboard at this ranking.....this is what they think of you.....

 

THIS IS WHAT THEY THINK OF YOU!

 

Lets go get this done.....for Reggie! Reggie on 3......1...2...3....REGGIE!"

[Coffeedrinker]

Peter King is entitled to his opinion. I don't agree with them in this case, but for that, I won't call him a bum or anything. I actually enjoy his work more than I do other writers.

Wait, what?  Don't you know that anytime a sports writer says something negative about the Colts that writer is instantly an ignorant, drug using, incestuous (on his mother's side), hack who knows nothing about the sport of which he is writing.

 

[ColtRider]

ColtSense v. Peter King : We now know what King thinks ... this is what I think ... ( it's way too early, but I'll bite)

1. Seattle

2. Green Bay

3. Indianapolis

4. Baltimore

5. New England

6. Denver

7. Dallas

8. Detroit

9. Pittsburgh

10. Buffalo/Miami

This is considering all teams after the Draft & FA from my point of view.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

Baltimore as the #1 team in the AFC.. Maybe.

But to have them as the best team in the NFL is just mind boggling.

 

^^^^ What he said.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

I keep trying to edit my responses & they disappear. Time for me to scan another thread I guess. "No such topic" is very annoying. 

 

There were 2 threads on this that started today. My guess is that you were probably trying to edit as the 2 threads got merged.

[amfootball]

Peter King is entitled to his opinion. I don't agree with them in this case, but for that, I won't call him a bum or anything. I actually enjoy his work more than I do other writers.

Yeah, I feel the same way. These lists are there just for debates anyways. King is one of the better football guys out there.

[jskinnz]

Sounds like this Peter King loser needs to get out of the ally and put the crack pipe down before he completely loses it. Nobody cares what this guy thinks.

 

HIs ranking may be completely off base but this post is simply not close to accurate.  He is among the most well-read & respected writers who covers the game.  His in-season MMQB are must reads for many.  Just because he gave the Colts an un-flattering appraisal does not change this fact.

[NewColtsFan]

Sounds like this Peter King loser needs to get out of the ally and put the crack pipe down before he completely loses it. Nobody cares what this guy thinks.

 

Peter King has been covering the NFL for longer than you've been alive.

 

In fact, he's probably been covering the NFL for nearly as long as your parents have been alive.

 

Loser is the last word you'd want to put on King.

 

Do I agree with him?    No, of course not.    I think he's going to regret this ranking. 

 

But in the Big Picture of things,  I'm glad he did this....   I love bulletin board material that gets my favorite team even more fired up.

[jskinnz]

I do not understand why writers do power rankings.  

 

No matter what you say 31 fanbases will rant on you as to why their team was not higher.  

 

Because their editors tell them to because we read them.  Clicks = $$.

 

I clicked on to read it and as a Colts fan was surprised by their low ranking but they got what they wanted - my eyes on their content and in a post-article discussion about it which drives more clicks.

[oldunclemark]

I do not understand why writers do power rankings.  

 

No matter what you say 31 fanbases will rant on you as to why their team was not higher.

J is right....That's probably the goal

[COLTS449]

Peter King has been covering the NFL for longer than you've been alive.

 

In fact, he's probably been covering the NFL for nearly as long as your parents have been alive.

 

Loser is the last word you'd want to put on King.

 

Do I agree with him?    No, of course not.    I think he's going to regret this ranking. 

 

But in the Big Picture of things,  I'm glad he did this....   I love bulletin board material that gets my favorite team even more fired up.

 

I understand. But not only was his list just straight up horrible, but his reasoning behind several of the choices was just ridiculous. But back to the rankings, I mean Minnesota at 6? And KC isn't a bad team. They'll be in the hunt. But they aren't the 4th best team in the league. Philly isn't top 10 either IMO. Me thinking the article is nuts isn't just because of him putting us at 11. Although that is nuts in itself.

[COLTS449]

The real top 10.

 

1) Seattle

2) Indianapolis

3) Green Bay

4) New England

5) Denver

6) Pittsburgh

7) Dallas

8) Baltimore

9) Kansas City

10) Cincinnati

 

Detroit, Miami, San Diego and Arizona are all close. And really any 1 could be put at 10. Possibly St. Louis but we'll see how they look. Another team to look out for is Atlanta. They may end up being really good.

[Blackhawk4]

Peter King says something a majority of people disagree with? 

 

 

The real top 10.

 

1) Seattle

2) Indianapolis

3) Green Bay

4) New England

5) Denver

6) Pittsburgh

7) Dallas

8) Baltimore

9) Kansas City

10) Cincinnati

 

Detroit, Miami, San Diego and Arizona are all close. And really any 1 could be put at 10. Possibly St. Louis but we'll see how they look. Another team to look out for is Atlanta. They may end up being really good.

 

Just being sure, when you say "The real top 10." you do mean your top 10.

[superrep1967]

Baltimore as the #1 team in the AFC.. Maybe.

But to have them as the best team in the NFL is just mind boggling.

There not the number 1 team in the AFC. But just like Flacco there way over rated again. Why because the Patriots were flat against them so now there a great team.

[superrep1967]

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/06/01/nfl-power-rankings-peter-king-daughter-wedding/5/

 

His nonsense includes ranking Baltimore at 1, Kansas City at 4, Minnesota at 6, and Philly at 7. 

 

Oh and he ranks the Colts at 11.....

 

I think someone is hitting the apple juice a little hard.

Come on Peter Queen.

[MTC]

12. Cincinnati (10-5-1). The running game, and the offensive line, should be enough to make up for Andy Dalton if he struggles. But I don’t think a team can be great unless its quarterback is close to great.

 

Yet he has Chiefs at #4.

 

 

 

WHAT

[CanuckColt]

You have to understand that King is a big New England fan and does not like the Colts...so he takes every opportunity to diss the Colts, even if he looks silly.

[Thewholefnshow28]

Because their editors tell them to because we read them.  Clicks = $$.

 

I clicked on to read it and as a Colts fan was surprised by their low ranking but they got what they wanted - my eyes on their content and in a post-article discussion about it which drives more clicks.

 

I was being a bit facetious as it is all about click bait because they know it will get 31 fan bases in a tizy.  I mean just look at our fellow fans who are throwing a fit about where this team is.  Of course, someone gives us the real top 10 and magically we are number two.  That sums up this whole thing and Peter should be better than that, but $$$ and driving clicks is more important.

[COLTS449]

 

Peter King says something a majority of people disagree with? 

 

 

 

Just being sure, when you say "The real top 10." you do mean your top 10.

 

 

LOL. Yeah.

[NewColtsFan]

I understand. But not only was his list just straight up horrible, but his reasoning behind several of the choices was just ridiculous. But back to the rankings, I mean Minnesota at 6? And KC isn't a bad team. They'll be in the hunt. But they aren't the 4th best team in the league. Philly isn't top 10 either IMO. Me thinking the article is nuts isn't just because of him putting us at 11. Although that is nuts in itself.

 

Hey,  I don't agree with his list.    I think we've all found something that Peter King doesn't do well.

 

Power rankings.

 

He sucks at it.    I didn't think much of the rest of the list.

 

But King knows football.   And he's got great sources.   He's not always going to be right,  but he'll be right far more than he's wrong.

 

Remember,  he's covering all 32 teams, and not just the Colts.

[Andrew Luck's Beard]

1) Seattle

2) Green Bay

3) Patriots (till we even come close to beating them, this will not change)

4) Indy

5) Broncos

6) Cowboys

7) Ravens

8) Steelers

9) Cardinals

10) Eagles

[Restored]

While I don't agree with his rankings, his logic is easy to identify. He sees some of these teams with more overall talent on paper than maybe a team like the Colts. But how many times have we see a team with a ton of talent underachieve? (Cough Cowboys cough).

[COLTS449]

1) Seattle

2) Green Bay

3) Patriots (till we even come close to beating them, this will not change)

4) Indy

5) Broncos

6) Cowboys

7) Ravens

8) Steelers

9) Cardinals

10) Eagles

 

I understand your logic, but I disagree. I think we're better than them. Look at what all they lost. Especially in their secondary, and look at what we've added to our offense. Yeah BB's the best coach in the game, and he's always gonna have a brilliant game plan, but I still think we're the better team right now.