NFL Future Power Rankings

dogorama · Jul 11, 2016

For my money, this is the ranking I am most interested in. The strength of any NFL franchise is predicated upon its long term viability, not in building a team that contends for 1-2 years. http://espn.go.com/nfl/insider/story/_/ ... high-marks

gtcotcakya · Jul 11, 2016

Posting a link to an insider article with no op summary is of no value to those of us who aren't insiders...

kearly · Jul 11, 2016

Given the relative lack of drafting success since 2013, and when considering that our defense will begin to feel old in the not too distant future, I was a little surprised to see Seattle top the list. I think the major reason they have Seattle this high is Russell Wilson, who many are now proclaiming to be this generations' Tom Brady. Seattle is currently the best team in the NFL, but they also feel like a "set" roster with very few rising additions. Having Seattle #1 is a warranted ranking, but it did surprise me slightly, especially since Seattle did not rank #1 in these rankings last year (IIRC).

Edit: Just noticed that they are ranking based on the 2016-2018 seasons only. Having Seattle #1 for the next three seasons only is a no-brainer.

HawkGA · Jul 11, 2016

Their lowest score was on the draft, which was still the highest score compared to other teams. Pretty impressive.

dogorama · Jul 11, 2016

gtcotcakya":2ryy7ibx said:
Posting a link to an insider article with no op summary is of no value to those of us who aren't insiders...

There is a summary of Seattle at the #1 ranking. That is all I need.

TriCHawk · Jul 11, 2016

Future Power Rankings or Futile Power Rankings?

Bill Assumpcao · Jul 11, 2016

gtcotcakya":1olugd00 said:
Posting a link to an insider article with no op summary is of no value to those of us who aren't insiders...

Maybe take a look here,

ESPN: Seahawks in Good Shape For Next Three Years

http://www.seahawks.com/news/2016/07/11/monday-round-which-nfl-teams-are-set-best-next-three-seasons

Go Hawks,
BillA

dogorama · Jul 11, 2016

Bill Assumpcao":1bwaoj7h said:
gtcotcakya":1bwaoj7h said:

Posting a link to an insider article with no op summary is of no value to those of us who aren't insiders...

Click to expand...

Maybe take a look here,

ESPN: Seahawks in Good Shape For Next Three Years

Click to expand...

http://www.seahawks.com/news/2016/07/11/monday-round-which-nfl-teams-are-set-best-next-three-seasons

Go Hawks,
BillA

Thanks Bill, this says the same thing as the insider article but adds that Arizona is #6, LA at #30, and SF at #31. I am surprised at LA but not at the other two in our division.

gtcotcakya · Jul 11, 2016

Awesome! Thank you :2thumbs:

Ambrose83 · Jul 11, 2016

kearly said:
Given the relative lack of drafting success since 2013, and when considering that our defense will begin to feel old in the not too distant future, I was a little surprised to see Seattle top the list. I think the major reason they have Seattle this high is Russell Wilson, who many are now proclaiming to be this generations' Tom Brady. Seattle is currently the best team in the NFL, but they also feel like a "set" roster with very few rising additions. Having Seattle #1 is a warranted ranking, but it did surprise me slightly, especially since Seattle did not rank #1 in these rankings last year (IIRC).

Edit: Just noticed that they are ranking based on the 2016-2018 seasons only. Having Seattle #1 for the next three seasons only is a no-brainer.[/quo

Wtf are you talking about? We have drafted great basically yearly .

hawknation2016 · Jul 11, 2016

The last two draft classes, in particular, look very strong. Of course, they need to actually produce now.

I anticipate there will be at least five starters this year from that young group:
Tyler Lockett - Pro Bowler/All-Pro returner, 3rd most efficient WR in DVOA last season as a rookie.
Frank Clark - Expected starter at LEO, extraordinary power/explosiveness, excellent run defender.
Mark Glowinski - Expected starter at LG, flashed physicality and pass blocking in his one start.
Germain Ifedi - Expected starter at RG, possesses premier power, length, and explosiveness.
Jarran Reed - Expected starter at NT, powerful anchor and high run stop efficiency.

Clark and Reed will probably be part-time starters, but each could fill a crucial role.

Nick Vannett, Joey Hunt, Rees Odhiambo, and Quinton Jefferson are all exciting prospects who will be competing to get into the mix. All four of those rookies have the potential to eventually breakout as contributors. Tye Smith, Terry Poole, and Kristjan Sokoli have all had good off-seasons after red-shirting as rookies. C.J. Prosise, Alex Collins, and Zac Brooks will be competing to emerge from a deep RB corps.

ESPN gave the Seahawks a relatively low score of 86.0 for their drafts, in comparison to their much higher scores in the other areas, but that draft score is still the best in the league. Right there, that shows that every team struggles with finding consistent starter-caliber talent in the draft. The Seahawks just happen to be one of the very best at it since Carroll and Schneider took over.

chris98251 · Jul 12, 2016

I think Kearly basis his rank on immediate impact, not the red shirt version which is what we do a lot of now and how much they contribute. Also where we take players and where he and others have them ranked regardless of contribution. That's a more traditional approach to grading.

kobebryant · Jul 12, 2016

kearly":15khalmx said:
Given the relative lack of drafting success since 2013, and when considering that our defense will begin to feel old in the not too distant future, I was a little surprised to see Seattle top the list. I think the major reason they have Seattle this high is Russell Wilson, who many are now proclaiming to be this generations' Tom Brady. Seattle is currently the best team in the NFL, but they also feel like a "set" roster with very few rising additions. Having Seattle #1 is a warranted ranking, but it did surprise me slightly, especially since Seattle did not rank #1 in these rankings last year (IIRC).

Edit: Just noticed that they are ranking based on the 2016-2018 seasons only. Having Seattle #1 for the next three seasons only is a no-brainer.

I think '18 is the furthest that can be realistically projected, as it is when a lot of the players who just completed their rookie years will be due for their 2nd contract. Take the non first round rookies from last season for example - as much as an upset as it would be if Tyler Lockett, Thomas Rawls, Ronald Darby and Stephon Diggs weren't with their current teams in 19', it is a possibility that makes looking at 19 and beyond a tough task.

Projecting beyond '18 could really only come down to having a franchise QB locked up beyond that point, and a bigtime head coach with iron clad job security; and in that case it is probably still Seattle, Carolina, Pitt and GB (though I suppose McCarthy's seat could get hot).

Jimjones0384 · Jul 12, 2016

Ambrose83":1thqrd5h said:
kearly":1thqrd5h said:

Given the relative lack of drafting success since 2013, and when considering that our defense will begin to feel old in the not too distant future, I was a little surprised to see Seattle top the list. I think the major reason they have Seattle this high is Russell Wilson, who many are now proclaiming to be this generations' Tom Brady. Seattle is currently the best team in the NFL, but they also feel like a "set" roster with very few rising additions. Having Seattle #1 is a warranted ranking, but it did surprise me slightly, especially since Seattle did not rank #1 in these rankings last year (IIRC).

Edit: Just noticed that they are ranking based on the 2016-2018 seasons only. Having Seattle #1 for the next three seasons only is a no-brainer.[/quo

Wtf are you talking about? We have drafted great basically yearly .

Click to expand...

Exactly. This is a hard roster to break. Having roster resets every year isn't a good thing. You don't want to have to rely on a bunch of rookies every year to try and compete. Because of the way the roster is structured, they can allow these players to learn the hawk way before just being thrown to the wolves. We have a bunch of young guys ready to play. The success of recent drafts will be apparent after this season. Go hawks

hawknation2016 · Jul 12, 2016

chris98251":up6uk5pl said:
I think Kearly basis his rank on immediate impact, not the red shirt version which is what we do a lot of now and how much they contribute. Also where we take players and where he and others have them ranked regardless of contribution. That's a more traditional approach to grading.

Tyler Lockett certainly provided an immediate impact last season by any measure. Frank Clark had a substantial impact as a rookie. The average NFL draft averages only about one rookie starter per team and fewer than three total rookie role players. Each DIVISION in the NFL averages fewer than one standout rookie each year. A rookie contributor as successful as Lockett is far outside the norm.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2455 ... ate-impact

Having a star rookie, plus a couple future starters in Clark and Glowinski, in addition to three promising "red-shirts," is the definition of a successful draft class in the NFL.

Because the Seahawks' roster is loaded at just about every position, except offensive line and SLB, we are not just looking for starters at most positions, but rather high quality starters.

The 2015 class is already above the norm. Meanwhile, the 2016 class looks poised to produce at least two rookie starters and eventually as many as four or five quality starters. The future for these young players in Seattle is very bright.

The most interesting question is whether some of these young players can elevate the level of play along the offensive line -- our weakest and most unstable position group. Can Glowinski and Ifedi shore up what has been below average play at the guard positions? Those are two powerful, explosive athletes who simply lack experience. Can freakish athlete Sokoli show that he has refined his technique enough to make an impact in training camp? Will promising G/T Odhiambo battle for a critical spot in the two deep? Can Hunt overcome the perception of his lack of height and compete to start at center? These are the young players I am most curious to watch develop over the next couple seasons.

dogorama · Jul 12, 2016

hawknation2016":1oiu8hmn said:
chris98251":1oiu8hmn said:

I think Kearly basis his rank on immediate impact, not the red shirt version which is what we do a lot of now and how much they contribute. Also where we take players and where he and others have them ranked regardless of contribution. That's a more traditional approach to grading.

Click to expand...

Tyler Lockett certainly provided an immediate impact last season by any measure. Frank Clark had a substantial impact as a rookie. The average NFL draft averages only about one rookie starter per team and fewer than three total rookie role players. Each DIVISION in the NFL averages fewer than one standout rookie each year. A rookie contributor as successful as Lockett is far outside the norm.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2455 ... ate-impact

Having a star rookie, plus a couple future starters in Clark and Glowinski, in addition to three promising "red-shirts," is the definition of a successful draft class in the NFL.

Because the Seahawks' roster is loaded at just about every position, except offensive line and SLB, we are not just looking for starters at most positions, but rather high quality starters.

The 2015 class is already above the norm. Meanwhile, the 2016 class looks poised to produce at least two rookie starters and eventually as many as four or five quality starters. The future for these young players in Seattle is very bright.

The most interesting question is whether some of these young players can elevate the level of play along the offensive line -- our weakest and most unstable position group. Can Glowinski and Ifedi shore up what has been below average play at the guard positions? Those are two powerful, explosive athletes who simply lack experience. Can freakish athlete Sokoli show that he has refined his technique enough to make an impact in training camp? Will promising G/T Odhiambo battle for a critical spot in the two deep? Can Hunt overcome the perception of his lack of height and compete to start at center? These are the young players I am most curious to watch develop over the next couple seasons.

Excellent analysis and as you say the most interesting question is whether these young OL can be productive starters. We cannot afford to get off to a start like last year again with virtually all of the other position groups so well stocked. The key to this year is Tom Cable, if he makes this group successful look for him to be in line for another HC position.

kearly · Jul 14, 2016

They say that an "average" draft produces two good starters. Can we name 8 good starters to come out of the past 4 drafts? I struggle to get there. After Clark, Lockett and Reed the rest of the group drops off a ton. Part of that is redshirt, part of that is trading for Harvin and Graham, and part of that is Seattle drafting role-players higher than other teams would. But for me, I would expect a top drafting team to produce 12+ good starters over 4 drafts, which is exactly what Seattle did in their first three drafts alone.

When looking at the past 7 years of drafting combined, Seattle has drafted well. However, the overwhelming bulk of that success came 5+ years ago. The trend of the past four years paints a very different picture. I have have a hard time getting behind their #1 rank for Seattle's draft score based on Seattle's recent history. Just my opinion.

Laloosh · Jul 14, 2016

Tend to agree with ^^ that. I'm not a draft junkie but I think the Harvin and Graham trades have a decent amount to do with it.

Disclaimer: I haven't fact checked my comment below for who was drafted, who was an UDFA, etc.

Alternatively, some guys who have demonstrated decent talent / upside have had injury issues that might have a fair amount to do with how we see those drafts. KPL, Marsh, Simon, Pinkins(?), Hill, Richardson, etc.

Had they been healthy and able to get more snaps, who knows if it's a different impression of those drafts looking back?

brettb3 · Jul 14, 2016

kearly":3t0kzgi9 said:
They say that an "average" draft produces two good starters. Can we name 8 good starters to come out of the past 4 drafts? I struggle to get there. After Clark, Lockett and Reed the rest of the group drops off a ton. Part of that is redshirt, part of that is trading for Harvin and Graham, and part of that is Seattle drafting role-players higher than other teams would. But for me, I would expect a top drafting team to produce 12+ good starters over 4 drafts, which is exactly what Seattle did in their first three drafts alone.

When looking at the past 7 years of drafting combined, Seattle has drafted well. However, the overwhelming bulk of that success came 5+ years ago. The trend of the past four years paints a very different picture. I have have a hard time getting behind their #1 rank for Seattle's draft score based on Seattle's recent history. Just my opinion.

You're counting the 2016 draft already?

Maulbert · Jul 14, 2016

kearly":12n9u51y said:
They say that an "average" draft produces two good starters. Can we name 8 good starters to come out of the past 4 drafts? I struggle to get there. After Clark, Lockett and Reed the rest of the group drops off a ton. Part of that is redshirt, part of that is trading for Harvin and Graham, and part of that is Seattle drafting role-players higher than other teams would. But for me, I would expect a top drafting team to produce 12+ good starters over 4 drafts, which is exactly what Seattle did in their first three drafts alone.

When looking at the past 7 years of drafting combined, Seattle has drafted well. However, the overwhelming bulk of that success came 5+ years ago. The trend of the past four years paints a very different picture. I have have a hard time getting behind their #1 rank for Seattle's draft score based on Seattle's recent history. Just my opinion.

Maybe, but consider that we still have 6 starters from the three drafts before that (plus Jeremy Lane, who's kind of a starter), and that was after losing 5 starters from those drafts. From 2010-12, we genuinely produced 12 starting caliber players in the draft (Wilson, Wagner, Lane, Irvin, Sweezy in 2012, Sherman, Wright, Maxwell in 2011, and Thomas, Chancellor, Tate, Okung in 2010). And we got ADB as an undrafted free agent in 2011. The oldest of those guys are only in their late in 20s. I don't think it's time to panic just yet. Schneider and Carroll haven't gone full Baalke on us just yet, we've just been really spoiled.

NFL Future Power Rankings

New member

Member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Member

New member

Member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Similar threads