15 comments Don Banks Makes A Power Poll Based on Each Team's Record Last Year

It is Fantasy Football time again. If anyone is interested in me starting up a BotB fantasy football league again, just tell me in the comments or email me and I will set it up if we have enough interest. I would like to do one this year because Fantasy Football is my favorite sport. So anyone who wants to play, just tell me and I will set the league up. I currently have interest from one person.

Donnie (Brasco) Banks has released his first NFL power poll of the year. I am sure one person rejoiced about this. Unfortunately, his power poll looks a lot like it was made based on how each NFL team did last year. He doesn't project the team's records for this year at all. I find this disappointing and a little bit lazy to be honest. To give him credit, he does list why he ranks each team the way he does, but I don't know if his power poll rankings are realistic. It's like he didn't want to project how good each team would be this year so he just stuck with the status quo from last year.

Before I get to that article, I want to talk about the most important topic in the history of this blog. I am shocked to hear that Terrence Cody is not in shape. Who would have thought a guy who couldn't stay in shape in college when he wasn't getting paid (as far as we know), can't stay in shape in the NFL either? I don't know what the conditioning test for a defensive tackle requires, but I have a feeling it isn't the most strenuous set of exercises required for a human being to perform. So in conclusion, Cody has just re-affirmed exactly why he was taken in the second round and taken off many team's draft boards. This is the end of the shocking news. A fat guy who has never been able to stay in shape, isn't able to stay in shape.

Okay, back to the Don Banks power poll for the day. It took possibly 2 minutes for him to get this power poll together.

When you do your first set of NFL power rankings as training camps open, the tendency is to make it an exercise in looking backward, at the season that wrapped up almost six months ago. After all, what else do we have to judge by other than the most recent games and results?

The tendency is to base power rankings on how the teams finished last year, so that is exactly what Don Banks did here.

But of course that's all wrong.

Yet he did it anyway.

Of course, he is a Starwood Preferred member so he can do whatever the hell he wants.

At this time of year we should be looking forward, and trying to figure out where the NFL landscape has changed without any games -- other than the hiring, firing and personnel acquisition kind -- having been played.

We should be looking forward, but who cares about that? Let's just list the teams in the first power poll of the year based on how they did last year. Otherwise there is a lot of work involved. Doing a lot of work is a risk Banks doesn't want to take right now.

So here's an early attempt to divine the relative strengths and weaknesses of teams as they report to camp,

The strengths? Same as last year.

The weaknesses? Same as last year.

and keep in mind these aren't predictions of what will be in 2010 as much as they're a snapshot of where I perceive teams are right now in late July.

It appears that Don Banks perceives these teams are all in the same place right now as they were last year. Actually, Banks is correct (in theory) that the power poll he got together is how the NFL teams should be ranked because no games have been played, but he did say he was looking to project how some teams would do this year, so he failed miserably in my mind. Besides, no one wants to read a power poll that just has the rankings of how strong the teams were at the end of last year.

Even knowing these aren't predictions for the upcoming year, why put together a power poll that basically says, "nothing has happened that would change the order from the end of last year?" I know these aren't predictions, but there haven't been games played yet this year and this is how strong Don Banks sees these NFL teams...so this power poll is a different form of predicting what will happen this year.

As always, your results may vary.

Or not vary if the results are based on the 2009 NFL results like this power poll seems to be. Here are the records of the teams Don Banks listed from #1-#32. You will find the better teams of 2009 are near the top, while the worst teams from 2009 are near the bottom.

There is nothing wrong with doing a power poll this way, but the NFL is pretty unpredictable and teams often switch places in the standings from year-to-year, so I feel like Don Banks should have moved some teams around due to this. So knowing NFL teams often aren't consistent (in regard to record) from year-to-year this isn't a very well thought-out power poll. He may not be predicting, but he also isn't saying a whole lot has changed since last year.

The record of the teams and their ranking in his power poll:

1. 9-7 (The Jets, who were in the AFC Championship game last year)
2. 13-3
3. 9-7
4. 14-2
5. 11-5
6. 13-3
7. 12-4
8. 11-5
9. 9-7
10. 10-6
11. 11-5
12. 8-8
13. 10-6
14. 9-7
15. 8-8
16. 10-6
17. 7-9
18. 9-7
19. 8-8
20. 8-8
21. 8-8
22. 4-12
23. 7-9
24. 5-11
25. 5-11
26. 7-9
27. 2-14
28. 3-13
29. 4-12
30. 5-11
31. 6-10
32. 1-15

Sorry for that wall of numbers, but I wanted everyone to see how much like a copy of last year this power poll seemed to be. The Jets are a 9-7 team at #1, but they are also a team that made the AFC Championship last year and are a sexy pick for this year as well.

Here are my problems with this power poll:

1. There isn't a team with a losing record last year among his top 16 teams. So he is essentially saying no teams with a losing record last year will appears to be able to make the playoffs this year. That doesn't seem likely.

2. Number 22 through 32 are all teams with losing records last year. When does the NFL have teams with such consistent good/bad records from year-to-year? Rarely ever. The NFL is known for it's parity and how each year teams can be very good or very bad. Either Don Banks was lazy or he is going to look like a genius. You can guess which one I think.

3. Of the ten teams from spots #1-10, nine of them made the playoffs last year. History is not on Don Banks side for this to repeat.

4. The lowest Banks has a playoff team from last year is #16. That team is the Bengals. Otherwise, the other two playoff teams are #11 and #13. So basically Don Banks has 10 of the 12 playoff teams making the playoffs again. Again, I know these aren't predictions, but with no games having been played this poll is as good as a prediction at this point.

So either the NFL is pretty much going to repeat itself from last year and Don Banks seems to think the best and worst teams in the NFL are going to be the best and worst this year...or this power poll is going to look way off by December.

I'm not asking Don Banks to try and shake things up intentionally, but history doesn't bode well for a power poll that essentially has the best and worst teams in the NFL repeat this pattern again the next year. I'm not saying the power poll is wrong, because I can't predict the future, but I am saying Don Banks perhaps should have done some more research into what each team did positively and negatively in the offseason and not rely on what teams did last year so much.

-Don Banks' good friend, co-worker, and future Fight Club member, Peter King has his Tuesday mailbag out and he has some advice for Terrell Owens.

In case you were wondering, the advice for Owens from Peter isn't "and you're still an asshole."

Usually I'd say in the case of the Bengals chasing a player with serious baggage, that it's owner Mike Brown forcing a guy into Marvin Lewis' locker room, causing Lewis to roll his eyes and say, "How exactly am I supposed to handle all these divas?''

I have found lately many writers are starting to use the trend of writing things like, "normally I wouldn't do or believe Situation X, but in this case I do." Joe Morgan did it the other day when talking about criticizing Joe Torre. It is as if because Peter King doesn't believe this is a case where Mike Brown is forcing a player on Marvin Lewis, when he usually believes it to be so, this gives his thoughts on the motivation for signing Owens more credibility. It's like using your own opinion to establish credibility for a statement.

But the Bengals' pursuit of Terrell Owens, from all indications, is a Carson Palmer production. Palmer, who slumped badly at the end of last season, wants weapons.

So it is Carson Palmer who is forcing a guy into Marvin Lewis' locker room, causing Lewis to roll his eyes and say, "How exactly am I supposed to handle all these divas?"

Well, that is completely different then. As long as it is not the owner doing the forcing of Owens on Marvin Lewis and a player who is doing this, I am sure this makes all the difference in the world.

Peter posted his advice on Tuesday morning and on Tuesday evening the Bengals signed Owens, so it looks like Owens didn't care for Peter's advice too much. Now the Bengals have a commitment to running the ball with Cedric Benson and three wide receivers in Bryant, Owens, and Johnson that all want the ball. Did I forget to mention they drafted Jordan Shipley also? Adding Owens is supposed to make the Bengals one of the top offenses in the NFL. It's not 2004, so I will wait and see if that happens or not. They have a better passing game now, but that's a lot of guys who aren't elite receivers to keep happy.

Now, part of the issue is the continuing question about Bryant's health. Last year, he struggled with a knee injury all season, even after having what was thought to be minor surgery. The knee was still bothering him at a June minicamp, when he couldn't practice in every session. The coaches won't know exactly what they have in Bryant until they get on the practice field Thursday at the start of training camp in Georgetown, Ky.

I can give the Bengals coaches a hint about what they have in Antonio Bryant. They have a guy who has a ton of talent, doesn't always perform well and wants a new contract. He could be a #1 receiver assuming you could count on him in any way...which the Bengals really can't. He may have 1,200 yards this season or he may play five games of the upcoming season due to injuries or suspension. So signing Owens may have been a good thing if Bryant is injured or it may be a terrible thing if Bryant is healthy because he will want 5 catches per game just like Johnson and T.O. want.

in Cincinnati, playoff consistency is an oxymoron -- and he doesn't want to be sitting there in October thinking, I can't count on Bryant, and I can't trust which way Gresham and Shipley are going at nut-cutting time.

Maybe the reason there aren't a lot of players who want to play for the Bengals is because they have nut-cutting time. I'm just going on a limb here, but "nut-cutting time" doesn't sound like something I would care to be a part of. It sounds like the opposite of fun.

With Cincinnati being a predominant running team, and investing the pick and money in the most athletic tight end in the draft this year, it's entirely possible the leading wide receiver on the team could catch 70 balls -- with the others below 50. I don't care how peaceful Owens is now. If he's catching two or three balls a week, he's not going to be happy.

I know why a team signs Terrell Owens...he produces fairly well still. But WHY would a team sign Terrell Owens? Specifically the Bengals. Is Chad Johnson not a handful enough for them to handle? I know they needed to get better offensively, but was there no other way to do this than sign T.O.? If Antonio Bryant or T.O. are at all demanding the football like Chad Johnson wants the football, it may be hard to keep everyone happy...especially when Cedric Benson wants his carries, Gresham will undoubtedly get some passes thrown his way and this doesn't include Jerome Simpson, Andre Caldwell, and Jordan Shipley, all who have been drafted in the last three years. Have the Bengals given up on Caldwell and Simpson? What about Shipley? He is a perfect slot receiver. Is this going to be a red-shirt year for him?

The Bengals have improved their offense, but only for one year, and I am not sure by how much.

But if I'm Owens, I'm thinking I've got two pretty interesting options: Take the Bengals' offer (it's got to be somewhere in the $2-million-a-year range, with incentives) and be content with a third-receiver role that could morph into something better

I don't think Owens could ever play the third receiver on an NFL team. Well, maybe he could do it for one year, but then at the end of the year he would call Carson Palmer a homosexual and make fun of the entire city of Cincinnati on his VH1 reality television show. It would be better to sign him to a one-year deal for this reason.

or wait until another team doesn't like what it sees in its receivers in camp or gets an injury at the position sometime in August. Unless the Bengals' offer is going to disappear, I think he'd be smart to wait.

This is great advice, but the Bengals offer could disappear. If training camp starts and Jordan Shipley shows he can handle being the 3rd receiver, Gresham shows the potential he has, and Bryant isn't terribly injured then there will be no place for Owens. T.O. knew this could happen and went ahead and signed with the Bengals.

Even if a team has a receiver get injured in camp, there is no guarantee this team would sign Owens. I don't know how desperate a team with no prior interest in Owens would have to be to show interest, but if an NFL team doesn't want Owens on their team after knowing he had 55 catches for 829 yards last year, I am not sure how much an injury to a receiver could change that. It would have to be an injury to an important receiver. I could be wrong, but it seems like many teams just don't have interest in signing a 2nd/3rd receiver who wants $2 million per year plus incentives and brings along some media baggage...other than the Bengals of course.

Before I get to my e-mail, I want to make one correction on Monday's column. I wrote that Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are all entering the final year of their contracts. Brady and Manning are, but Brees has two years to go. My mistake.

Blame it on the Starwood Preferred member asshole. He's a real piece of shit and had Peter all distracted-like with anger yesterday while recalling the epic battle of words they engaged in.

"Do you see a number of similarities between the Packers handing the reins to Aaron Rodgers and the Eagles doing the same to Kevin Kolb, feeling that the time is right for a title within a few years?''
-- Mark G., Folsom, Pa.

Except for the fact Donovan McNabb didn't retire/unretire, he didn't refuse to be traded and acted like a complete professional as he was essentially replaced by Kolb these two situations are exactly alike. Also, McNabb didn't attempt to force the Eagles to trade him to a certain team of his choosing, so there is that difference in the Favre-Green Bay quarterback situation also.

PK: But there's one difference: The Packers would have let Favre return for the 2008 season had he chosen in March to say he'd play rather than retire.

Like I just said, the only big difference is that Donovan McNabb didn't try to exert complete control over the team's direction at the quarterback position and force the Eagles to cater to whatever whim he felt on that certain day.

By the time he was certain he wanted to play, it was early July 2008, and the Packers, who'd already promised the job to Rodgers, felt they'd had enough of Favre's waffling and wouldn't reverse course.

Was Favre ever certain he wanted to play at any point in the summer of 2008? I am still not sure if Favre is certain he wants play in the summer of 2010. I don't believe Brett Favre is ever certain he wants to play. I think usually the NFL season is about to begin and Favre sees he will be back in the spotlight and figures he may as well play one more year. It is two years later after the Packers-Rodgers-retirement/unretirement situation and Favre is STILL not sure if he wants play football again. He'll be glad to tell a reporter that too, if you want to send one down to Mississippi and interview him about this issue.

"I'm a little surprised about your response to Dez Bryant. Attitude is one thing when you are talking about attitude against opposing players, but against your own team? For Bryant to take the stance that he is more important than the team is alarming, to say the least. Bryant should be willing to do whatever it takes to win. And part of that is forsaking individual pride for the team. It's the whole purpose of rookie hazing -- to bring them in as part of the team, to build trust and friendship. He's already put a wedge between himself and the team. And no matter how good he is, if he isn't part of the team, they can't use him.''
-- David, Arvada, Colo.

I was a little surprised Peter sided with Bryant as well. I thought Bryant would get a solid 50 word chiding from Peter...but I thought wrong.

PK: But I think you're overstating the story a bit. Bryant never said or implied that he "is more important than the team;'' he said he wasn't going along with the tradition of rookies carrying the vets' pads.

There isn't any overstating the story (okay, maybe a bit, but anything involving the Cowboys is overstated). Inherent in Bryant refusing to carry the pads is him forsaking the rookie hazing for individual pride. That's the problem with this gesture by Bryant, it isn't just a stupid tradition of carrying pads, it is Bryant saying, "other rookies may do this, but I am not any other rookie. I don't subscribe to rookie traditions and don't care to take part in these traditions just to be a part of the team."

The actual act of not carrying the pads is not the problem, it is what not carrying the pads seems to indicate about Bryant. It indicates he may not be willing to do everything he is told. Yes, it sounds stupid to jump to this conclusion, but it isn't a far leap. The player-player relationship is supposed to be a fraternity in the NFL, much more so than the coach-player relationship. Players understand what each other are going through as an NFL player, so if Bryant is willing to separate himself out from his peers like this, is he willing to do so when Wade Phillips asks him to do something?

It is a stupid tradition, but it is also a stupid tradition that builds support among teammates. What is Dez Bryant going to think in 2013 when a highly drafted Cowboys rookie refuses to carry Bryant's pads off the field? Will he understand or expect the rookie to do it? I think he would expect the rookie to do it and not refuse to do so because at that point Bryant will understand the reasoning behind the hazing.

And the point about Bryant not being able to be part of the team if he doesn't go along with this -- I just don't buy it. There will be some vets who hate him, and he could make it easier on himself by carrying the pads. But this story is a tempest in a teapot. It will pass.

This will pass. Simply because this will pass doesn't mean there isn't something in here about Dez Bryant we can't learn.

And when Bryant makes plays to help the Cowboys win -- and I think he will, early in the season -- no one's going to care much about this.

This is a stupid point. Anytime there is success on a team little things like this are forgotten. Success helps to make everything better, but even with success happening for the Cowboys, things that happen on the Cowboys team tends to get magnified a bit. The Cowboys and Terrell Owens were successful together and that didn't prevent problems from occurring did it?

Not that Bryant will turn into a huge distraction, but this is such a small thing Bryant had to do. I don't understand why he just didn't carry the pads.

"I enjoyed your reaction to Mr. Starwood Preferred, but I'd like to know what your wife thought about it since she presumably was standing right there.''
-- Jeffrey, Peoria, Ill.

PK: She thought that should have been the end of the story. But then I had to open my big mouth and make the situation an incendiary one. I understand her point, and we're both hardcore pacifists. Having said that, I felt I had to take a stand (as corny as it sounds, for all the people in line with us) and I don't regret it, because the guy had it coming.

Having said that? Here's one of my favorite "Curb Your Enthusiasm" scenes about that phrase.

"I don't understand how you can completely dismiss teams from being able to compete. I am a Bucs fan and I find it absolutely ridiculous to dismiss them or any other team already. When the Falcons drafted Matt Ryan, everyone was saying the Falcons may win 3-4 games and then they went to the playoffs so anything can happen. Now let me clarify: I don't think that the Bucs will be undefeated or anything crazy like that, but to dismiss a team that you barely cover or mention at all is dumb. Thank you for listening to the ravings of a Bucs fan tired of his team getting no national love or exposure.''
--Travis, Miami

I guess Travis missed the part where Peter King was going down to the Bucs training camp...for a half day. Peter is spending a full day at every other camp, but he is only giving the Bucs a half day. I am sure that would have angered Travis as well if he had caught that in Peter's MMQB for this week.

PK: Duly noted. We'll see.

Why even publish this question if you are going to give a four word answer that tells us nothing?

How do my questions to Peter not get published? I am always on my best behavior in the wording of the question and have great in-depth questions for him.