Redskins #14 in ESPN Offseason Power Rankings

Come on guys if anyone should know how are seasons going to be it's us,redskin fans.How do we always due the first year of a new coach 8-8 or less.turner,spurrier,marty,hell even joe gibbs.

lower than the vikings saints and eagles real nice

#14 isn't too bad, I thought they would place them much lower because Zorn is such an unknown at this point.

Lol, I've come to think that with predictions the more speculation surrounding you the better, in terms of harvesting favorable predictions.

For example in the NFL Draft it seems like more often then not, juniors and red shirt softmores that come out early, and in turn have less film available, are rated higher then seniors, even though theres considerably less information available on the potential pro prospects. So with that it seems to me that uncertainty turns into upside.

While with seniors that go back to school, usually that gives scouts more chances to find blemishes that in reality 99.9% of pro prospects have in some way, shape, or form.

My two main examples of prospects that underwent this are Matt Leinart and Jokim Noah, both projected to be top overall picks if they came out early, where following their senior years they both droped 6 and 8 spots to 7th and 9th overall in their respective sports. Same prospect, in fact probably even better prospects since they had another year of experience under their belts, but because scouts had more tape to look at they became uneasy, in part because they were "exposed."

So what happens? In the NFL junior QB Vince Young comes out and gets selected ahead of Leinart, and in the NBA Jokim Noah is passed up after the big 2 get selected for his teammate Al Horford (which wasn't exactly a bad pick, but still the point of being hurt for staying an extra year is made).

On a side note, I pray that Devin Thomas is an Al Horford instead of Jokim Noah.

There is a reason why there isnt a little number next to NFL teams like in the NCAA. Its because you cant really rank the teams in the NFL overall, at least not until the end of the season. Its the records that matter, and who you beat that determines your rank and seed # in week 17. I really do not care what the "experts" say and think. We could be ranked 32 by them and I wouldnt care at all. Thats all I have to say about that.

There is a reason why there isnt a little number next to NFL teams like in the NCAA. Its because you cant really rank the teams in the NFL overall, at least not until the end of the season. Its the records that matter, and who you beat that determines your rank and seed # in week 17. I really do not care what the "experts" say and think. We could be ranked 32 by them and I wouldnt care at all. Thats all I have to say about that.

Lol, I agree on the point that these rankings don't mean anything, but then again I would be a little concerned if the "exerpts" ranked the Skins 32 overall.

Top to bottom, we are the 4th best team in the East. We are also the oldest team in the league, so staying healthy will be an issue. If we can stay healthy, we do have as good a chance to win the East as any. It's just not a very smart bet.

We are STILL the oldest team in the league!?!?!

To me, at least, it seems like Power Rankings are the one place in sports where the ONLY intelligent system of ranking the teams would be an objective one--a heavily statistical-based one.

Seriously. You are ranking 32 teams in order from best to worst. It's not something that you have to do. It's not going to change the outcome of any game, or the perception of any players. If the goal isn't to be as precise as possible, then IMO, the authors are wasting their time.

Which is why comments like this are so perplexing:

"Hard to get a good read."

"This is certain: QB play is key."

But there are no guarantees with Tommy John surgery.

If WR Chad Johnson sits out, the Bengals will suffer.

This is an unpredictable team in the wake of the retirement of Brett Favre.

We don't know. We don't know. We don't know. Of course you don't know, it's May! I think their predictions would be more accurate if they had some (any) system to go by, and then I wouldn't feel so bad for reading this.

I think they have the Redskins in a logical spot. But it would be nice if they said "this team ranks only 14th because they are aging on defense and their quarterback and head coach still have a lot to prove, and may be a year or two away. Our system likes the Eagles, Browns, Saints, and Vikings more." as opposed to "Hard to get a good read."

That's why I can't read this stuff anymore.

We are STILL the oldest team in the league!?!?!Yeah. Our draft probably slid the average age of player on our team under 30, but we are still a good .5 years older (on average) then anyone else.

We are STILL the oldest team in the league!?!?!

How can that still be? This year remember we decided to resume participation in the NFL's annual draft??

Also under that pressure will be QB Derek Anderson who is largely unproven and who really struggled down the stretch last season, especially against Cinci in a must win game Week 16, and Jamal Lewis who had YPCs of 3.4 and 3.6 in 2005 and 2006.

Also, they have to play the two toughest divisions in the AFC South and the NFC East. Are they better than the Colts or Jags? The Texans even? I think we'll beat em pretty good.

They look more like a 5-6 win team at this point, but I don't doubt that their long term prospectus is on the rise. People are just going to jump the gun on them too soon, because that's what people do.

Or you can look at it this way. Clev added two solid d-tackles, D. Stallworth and Anderson has a full off season and training camp as the unquestioned starter. Add all that to Blaylon Edwards, Kellen Winslow Joe J., Jamal Lewis and you've got a pretty impressive set of skills guys. We'll see what happens but I like Cleveland over Balt, Pitts and Cinn.