Peter King's Pre-Training camp rankings

[B24]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writ...mmqb/index.html

13. Detroit: Some year I'll pick the Lions to do something good and actually be right about the prediction. This is the year they make a quantum leap, I believe, because the defense will adjust to Rod Marinelli and new coordinator Joe Barry and play well. I like a second year in the Mike Martz offense. If you let Jon Kitna slide past the fourth round in your fantasy draft, you're absolutely crazy. Keep one name in mind on defense: Ikaika Alama-Francis, who, at 6-5 and 280 pounds, will get the chance to be the kind of interior pass-rush presence Marinelli needs to make his defense work.

17. Cincinnati: Mediocre across the board last year -- 4-4 at home, 4-4 on the road, 6-6 in the conference. What's changed? Sam Adams and Leon Hall. In other words, very little. That's why I put the Bengals smack dab in the middle of the pack.

I don't usually think too much about these rankings, but does anyone seriously think Detroit is better than the Bengals?

[AMC]

DET 13????

Peter King again is saying things just to get a response.

Guess that makes a "good" columnist.....

[BengalszoneBilly]

I don't usually think too much about these rankings, but does anyone seriously think Detroit is better than the Bengals?

Not unless I get really drunk!

[walzav29]

I truly believe that something happend to Peter King when he covered the Bengals back in the day. Kitna over Palmer? I know I'm biased but the Bengals lost 6 games by 1 possession last year. They had the hardest schedule in the league, and played 6 playoff teams, as well as 2 games against the defending champs. These rankings are a joke. I think Pete Johnson may have banged Pete's ole' lady back in the day.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

Peter King is a complete idiot, and I will maintain that assertion even when he's saying nice things about the Bengals.

Also recall he's selling articles, and I'm sure he's going out on a limb to pick the next trendy team. DET will be in year 2 of the Martz offense, which should result in some improvement. That said, they still have Kitna, who will singlehandedly lose 3 games by throwing the ball straight at a D-lineman. I'm also not expecting that much from CJ in his first year, as WRs usually need a year or two to develop.

So they might be OK, but I doubt great. They'll be weak/mediocre at RB and QB. Heck, playing in the NFC, it's quite likely they could absolutely suck, yet end up with a record better than the Bengals. Who knows?

[CJBestInAFC]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writ...mmqb/index.html

13. Detroit: Some year I'll pick the Lions to do something good and actually be right about the prediction. This is the year they make a quantum leap, I believe, because the defense will adjust to Rod Marinelli and new coordinator Joe Barry and play well. I like a second year in the Mike Martz offense. If you let Jon Kitna slide past the fourth round in your fantasy draft, you're absolutely crazy. Keep one name in mind on defense: Ikaika Alama-Francis, who, at 6-5 and 280 pounds, will get the chance to be the kind of interior pass-rush presence Marinelli needs to make his defense work.

17. Cincinnati: Mediocre across the board last year -- 4-4 at home, 4-4 on the road, 6-6 in the conference. What's changed? Sam Adams and Leon Hall. In other words, very little. That's why I put the Bengals smack dab in the middle of the pack.

I don't usually think too much about these rankings, but does anyone seriously think Detroit is better than the Bengals?

Does anyone think any NFC team is better than the Bengals?

[HoosierCat]

While we're on the subject of preseason snapshots, I thought this from PFW on the AFCN was pretty good...

http://nflblogs.profootballweekly.com/Hand...andicapper.html

[Kazkal]

I don't mind not being top 10 we went 8-8 but WTF 17 with lions at 13?????

Dude if I ever saw that fat ass on the street I'd shove a Twinkie down his throat.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

Here is his reasoning - and considering Detroit's superior d-line and deeper WR talent etc.., it's his opinion and he's entitled to it.

Now do you guys have anything of substance to back up your feeling with?

***********

Q/A with Marvin

Enquirer

Question: Given how your team finished, losing its last three in a row, you said in February that you were on the hot seat. Do you still say that?

**********

Kings reacts to charges of Bengals bias

CNNSI

Three things about the Bengals, Harold:

1. They're 8-8 in three of the past four years.

2. Scoring was not their problem last year. They outscored five playoff teams. The lack of a consistent pass rush and allowing foes to complete 63 percent of their throws, now those are problems. Other than the addition of Leon Hall, I don't see that much was done to fix that in the offseason.

3. You act like injuries aren't going to happen. I don't think the Bengals were hit hard by injuries last year compared to other teams in the league. Their starting six skill players -- quarterback, two backs, two wideouts, one tight end -- missed a total of two games due to injury last year. Their best tackle, Willie Anderson, played 16. Their best defensive end and best safety played 16. I don't quite get the outrage.

With no Chris Henry and only 2 proven WR's on the entire roster who were healthy last year, and Chatman being the only experienced WR on the roster beyond that, I say there are questions abound - along with the Linebacking situation and the fact they did very little to actually upgrade the defense with proven or high ceiling, immediate talent.

We're counting on guys to play better than they have 3 out of the last 4 years in many cases. This team is also one injury or two away on the o-line or at TE from being a virtual disaster at protecting Palmer again, because there's not a lot of quality depth on this team now.

I'm hopeful they can still make the playoffs, but I'm not printing my tickets yet and it's time for the Bengals' to prove it.

I have my concerns. Sue me!