PDA

View Full Version : Sleeper Teams per espn


Clarkus76
06-11-2007, 11:40 AM
Waking up the sleeper teams
posted: Monday, June 11, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry
filed under: NFL

It's hard to tell if teams get anything out of "voluntary" OTAs except hope. Lousy teams aspire for the playoffs; playoff teams aspire for the Super Bowl; Super Bowl teams expect a return trip. Nothing captures the spirit of OTA season better than this quote from Texans owner Bob McNair in Monday's Houston Chronicle:

"In this league, you really need 18-21 quality players if you want to be in the playoffs every year, and we're building to that. We're not there yet, but we're very close, and that's why we think we'll be competitive this year and why we think we'll be competing for a playoff spot. That's our goal."

Today's blog focuses on sleeper candidates. To qualify, a team has to have finished .500 or lower in '06. (If I were to include all non-playoff teams as sleepers, underachievers like Denver and Pittsburgh would be allowed to slip in.) A team like Houston fits perfectly.

You have to admire the Texans since the Dom Capers era ended because they're a gambler in a conservative league. Last year's gamble was picking Mario Williams instead of Reggie Bush or any of the top quarterbacks. This year, it's letting David Carr go for free, while paying a steep price (swapping picks in this year's draft plus two next year, not to mention doling out a six-year, $48 million contract) for Matt Schaub, who has exactly two starts in his career.

Splitting with Carr, the face of the franchise, was probably the correct move, if only because Carr was truly burned out. In Schaub, Houston gets a passer eager for his break, even if he's less naturally gifted than his predecessor. "Talent-wise, there's no comparison between them," says Trent Dilfer, one of Carr's best friends. "David can make every throw."

Still, Schaub's energy has rubbed off on the Texans. During the offseason, he was constantly around the facility trying to engage the guys. Says cornerback Dunta Robinson, "He's different than David. He's cocky. He's got a lot of energy. He walks around asking the DBs, 'Anyone ready to go outside so I can make you look bad?' That was never really David's thing."

I'm among the many that believe the Panthers stole Carr, even if no team wanted to trade for him when Houston shopped him back in March. But it's hard not to admire Schaub's moxie. Couple Schaub with an improved defense that struggled holding onto fourth-quarter leads in '06 and a hungry back like Ahman Green, and you have a perfect June sleeper. Here are four others:

• Arizona: Last year, Arizona was the popular sleeper. That makes the Cardinals perfect for this year because expectations have been lowered. Nothing will come easy this year for Arizona. I don't see enough improvements to a defense that finished 29th overall and allowed 24 points a game. But if the offensive line improves, Arizona will be able to move the ball with anybody.

• San Francisco: The Niners are this year's Cardinals, sleeper-wise. San Francisco has the same sort feel that Cowboys had in the early '90s, a young team loaded with talent that's starting to emerge: a No. 1 overall quarterback who's coming into his own, a star tailback, a young defense. I'm still not sure the Niners will end up making the playoffs in a very competitive NFC West, but we'll get an early indication as to what they're made of when they play Arizona, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Seattle and Baltimore the first five weeks of the season.

• Buffalo: In one sense, it's a wonder more people aren't talking about the Bills, who finished 7-9 in a tough division and had one of the stronger drafts in April. In the other sense, there are many who aren't inspired by J.P. Losman. But the early word out of Buffalo's OTAs -- where, remember, everyone is forever optimistic -- is that Losman has been making sound decisions and isn't forcing the ball downfield, but is still sneaking in big plays to Roscoe Parrish.

• Tennessee: The Titans won six-of-seven to close out the year. Vince Young looks like the league's next indefensible weapon, despite his 51-percent completion rate and despite being the target of Merrill Hoge's rants. Tennessee's defense played well last year, especially after the return of DT Albert Haynesworth. But the Titans will miss Pacman Jones -- for at least one day out of the week, that is.

:hurray:

SO. CAL Heart-Throb
06-11-2007, 12:33 PM
i can see buffalo, san fran, and us as sleeper teams but the titans??... instead of giving vince young more support he has even less support to work with this season..

Cardsfan50
06-11-2007, 03:02 PM
I can understand why folks picked last year's team to be a sleeper, but I think this year we will be just what you see.

The flash and blaze are not what this team is about anymore. Those days left with Denny Green.

This year's Cards will be just what Whis said when he got here, smart, tough, disciplined, but they aren't going to surprise anyone or fool any experts.

They are a good solid mediocre team right now. I hope next year will be the year they get to the playoffs, but this year I only expect an 8 win season.

The trouble with the sky-rocket type of teams is they come down as fast as they went up. Lets be more like a choo-choo and move in an unstopable fashion till we win a Super Bowl. Then do it again and again, etc.

azbmxican
06-11-2007, 04:01 PM
seriously, STATS do not reflect how our defense played. This is another report going off stats he see's on paper and not actually watching games!!!:homer: :homer: :homer:

Tucson
06-11-2007, 04:31 PM
seriously, STATS do not reflect how our defense played. This is another report going off stats he see's on paper and not actually watching games!!!:homer: :homer: :homer:

Don't kid yourself...the defense was horrible for half the season.

azbmxican
06-11-2007, 04:33 PM
Don't kid yourself...the defense was horrible for half the season.

you don't kid yourself, because you should know the defense was not or is a 29th ranked defense.

HavasuCardsFan
06-11-2007, 05:19 PM
Don't kid yourself...the defense was horrible for half the season.

Tap your heels three times and say
If we only made those 3 field goals
If we only made those 3 field goals
If we only made those 3 field goals

:sarcasm:

Elminster
06-11-2007, 05:37 PM
Going by yardage is kinda overrated...the most important, IMO, is points-allowed and 3rd downs. If you don't give u more points than you score, nothing else really matters, now does it?:wink:

darthcard
06-11-2007, 05:50 PM
:Cards logo: IDK saying the cards are a sleeper is a bit pre-mature. Sure theres talent but talent alone doesnt cut it. The cards lacked a team togetherness as well as mediocre chemistry especially on offense. Even when the cards were playing good and had the lead it felt like they just couldnt deliver the knockout blow. The cards defense is reasonable imo capable of losing a game for you as well as make a big stop. Really it depends on whis. I mean graves and others believe the cards talent wise is as good as anyone. So lets see if the cards go 6-10 what the excuse will be.

ZOna_Style
06-12-2007, 11:42 AM
seriously, STATS do not reflect how our defense played. This is another report going off stats he see's on paper and not actually watching games!!!:homer: :homer: :homer:

Dude...our D was pretty poor last year.

No QB pressure...No Secondary.

fromstl2az
06-16-2007, 08:08 AM
our D is going to be poor when they are on the field most of the time. Come on now when you have an Off that is pass-pass-run 1 yard and then punt Def will get tired and not be able to do the things it's supposed to do. This year should be better.


:Cards logo: :Cards logo: :Cards logo:

thesmel
06-16-2007, 08:46 AM
Dude...our D was pretty poor last year.

No QB pressure...No Secondary.

Our D played good alot of the time but when we gambled we got burned when we needed pass rush to protect the corners on the island it just didn't happen QB's read and executed against our weakness for many big plays. I believe we will solidify our base 4-3 consistantly and take less risks. *** within a division that features top 5 backs I can see a 4-3 with both Gabe and Branch in there to stop the run.

BulldogsCards
06-16-2007, 08:52 AM
Sleeper means nothing, I'll believe when I see it actually happen on the field. First the players have to believe they can win when they take the field before any of this can happen. Too often in the past, when faced with just a little or the initial adversity of a game, the Cards would be 'here we go again'. They have to find a way to change that posture because good teams can sense it and they feed off it and get inside the head of the opponent. Luckily, our coaching staff is A+ quality and the ownership stepped it up for that, because we all know the players have it in them. They just need someone to help them find it.

ShadowBoxer
06-16-2007, 10:12 AM
Sleeper means nothing, I'll believe when I see it actually happen on the field. First the players have to believe they can win when they take the field before any of this can happen. Too often in the past, when faced with just a little or the initial adversity of a game, the Cards would be 'here we go again'. They have to find a way to change that posture because good teams can sense it and they feed off it and get inside the head of the opponent. Luckily, our coaching staff is A+ quality and the ownership stepped it up for that, because we all know the players have it in them. They just need someone to help them find it.

Exactly..the teams that suprise us are never these "sleeper" teams, because they SUPRISE US.

RipperEagle
06-16-2007, 12:38 PM
Question: how many years in a row have these experts picked the :Cards logo:to be a sleeper team?

If they were truly, then the media must feel like the :Cards logo:have been in a two-year long hibernation.

kjbad
06-16-2007, 12:44 PM
There are no sleeper teams. Every team wants to be the one hoisting the Lombardi trophy at the end of the Super Bowl but only one team will. This is the top level of competition. Everyone at that level better believe they can get it done, or they will not be playing at that level very long.

RipperEagle
06-16-2007, 12:55 PM
There are no sleeper teams. Every team wants to be the one hoisting the Lombardi trophy at the end of the Super Bowl but only one team will. This is the top level of competition. Everyone at that level better believe they can get it done, or they will not be playing at that level very long.

You are correct sir.

It's just that I find the innuedo of them picking teams like this so funny it's actually stupid.

But that's just me.

kjbad
06-16-2007, 01:03 PM
It's a good thing there are no power rankings for journalists, we might start ignoring the lower ranked ones... :)

ShadowBoxer
06-16-2007, 02:33 PM
It's a good thing there are no power rankings for journalists, we might start ignoring the lower ranked ones... :)

that'd be the best thing ever invented...

thesmel
06-16-2007, 05:30 PM
20. Arizona Cardinals — I gave the Cardinals my highest grade at April's draft — an A+. They had five picks and knocked each one out of the park. Levi Brown's the ideal anchor for Russ Grimm's offensive line, Alan Branch was a top 10 pick who inexplicably slipped to the second round because of combine workouts, and Buster Davis, Steve Breaston, and Ben Patrick will all contribute immediately. Ken Whisenhunt will work wonders with all the young weapons on that offense, and the defense picked up big additions Roderick Hood and Terrence Holt via free agency. Arizona's been a "sleeper" pick for what feels like close to a decade. If ever there was a year such talk is actually warranted, it's 2007.

NightHawk11and81
06-16-2007, 07:04 PM
that'd be the best thing ever invented...

Heck no, I don't need that!

thesmel
06-16-2007, 08:36 PM
makes em crazy and broke. :cardinals:
too bad channel 8 hasn't got NFL coverage. can you imagine NFL coverage without putting the argueing "reporters" center of attention.
We have power rankings for networks called ratings. Espn sportscenter wins because it's the closest thing to clean reporting.
not PTI or ROME but plain sportscenter.
:rockon:

NightHawk11and81
06-17-2007, 10:05 AM
makes em crazy and broke. :cardinals:
too bad channel 8 hasn't got NFL coverage. can you imagine NFL coverage without putting the argueing "reporters" center of attention.
We have power rankings for networks called ratings. Espn sportscenter wins because it's the closest thing to clean reporting.
not PTI or ROME but plain sportscenter.
:rockon:

I love PTI. But ESPN wins because it's all sports, all the time, and because it's ingrained in our culture now. We still have reporters who work for local TV stations. Great ones, in fact. But most people just flip to ESPN because they want highlights of everyone. Fox Sports Net is all else who does that, and they aren't as well known. It's not ESPN's journalistic integrity, although they have it, that makes them No. 1.

ShadowBoxer
06-17-2007, 12:10 PM
makes em crazy and broke. :cardinals:
too bad channel 8 hasn't got NFL coverage. can you imagine NFL coverage without putting the argueing "reporters" center of attention.
We have power rankings for networks called ratings. Espn sportscenter wins because it's the closest thing to clean reporting.
not PTI or ROME but plain sportscenter.
:rockon:

Yes, i've noticed that about sportscenter, the reporters stay very rigid in what they tell us..They just say what happened..

halftime
06-17-2007, 03:04 PM
thats all that is needed for a sleeper pick, upgrade coaching on fundamentals for special team , defence , offence and conditioning for strength for 4 quarters , and thats what the cardinals did so thats why we will be a sleeper pick :cardinals: