Gil Brandt has us 25th

[ICE74129]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9532593

[LifetimeBillsFan]

While I disagree with where he has some teams placed in his rankings, I think he has the Bills placed right about where they should be at this point: until the Bills' starting QB situation is clarified and the defense and offensive line are tested it would be difficult to rank them much higher than where Brandt has placed them, especially with the schedule that they play, although I do think that they will be better than Green Bay.

The problem with all of these preseason rankings and projections is that they are based on what the analysts know of the past performances of teams and players at a point in the season when there are still a lot of critical unknowns about many of the teams in the league. While it is fairly easy to look at the top teams and predict with some certainty how they will play because the coaching staffs and the core of those teams are going to be pretty much the same, it is much harder to project how those teams that have undergone front office and coaching changes or have had a large turnover in personnel--generally those teams in the bottom third to half of the league will perform under their new regimes. This off-season approximately a dozen teams have undergone such significant changes and it is hard to say how those teams will respond to those changes and ultimately shake-out. And, the Bills are one of those teams. It is hard for any analyst to know about all of the subtleties of the changes that could impact the performance of every team in this category and each analyst's perceptions and prejudices can influence how he ranks or rates a given team.

For example, Brandt gives plusses to Green Bay based on the ranking of their defense last season and the new offense that Coach McCarthy is bringing with him to the Packers. For my part, I would not rate those as plusses for the Pack: despite their ranking, I did not find the Green Bay defense to be that good last season and, while they have gotten better at LB, they lost their best run-stuffer in Grady Jackson; also, I'm not so sure that the Pack has the receiving corps, offensive line or the RB corps this season to fully implement McCarthy's WCO and wonder how well B.Favre will take to the new offense in what is supposed to be his last season. While the Pack has Favre and has bulked up its LB corps, I'm not convinced that they are going to end up being a better team than the Bills, especially if JP Losman, who we all know struggled last season, progresses to the level of a decent second year QB (which I expect). So, if I were writing an article of this nature (which Iwill not be doing!), I would have a very different perception of the Packers than Brandt does and would rank them differently, especially in relation to the Bills. Which is why I think that rankings like these--regardless of who does them (and I have a lot of respect for Gil Brandt)--should be taken with a healthy dose of salt.

But, of course, that's just my opinion! And anyone who reads this should take that with a HUGE dose of salt!!!

[YardRat]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8625255



Predictions

AFC playoff teams: Buffalo, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, New England, Pittsburgh and San Diego


From 2005...Apparently some Buffalo fans weren't the only ones that believed before the season started the team had a shot at the play-offs last year.

[R. Rich]

Gil Brandt is a very wise and knowledgeable football guy w/ many years of experience in the NFL and is well respected for his insight.

In other words, he doesn't know what the heck he's talking about and is dead wrong until he predicts the Bills to win the Super Bowl.

Loser.

[ICE74129]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8625255




From 2005...Apparently some Buffalo fans weren't the only ones that believed before the season started the team had a shot at the play-offs last year.

he bought the Tom Donahoe BS, like most of you did.