Jump to content

NFL Discussion


Recommended Posts

thought it was really kinda funny that he said they really investigate into the background of the players they draft, their history, performance, their family history, blahblahblah... which if that were true, then flags should have gone up when they looked into Hernandez since he was not an angel at Florida.  good for him to say that, but I dont believe that matters(mattered) to them at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thought it was really kinda funny that he said they really investigate into the background of the players they draft, their history, performance, their family history, blahblahblah... which if that were true, then flags should have gone up when they looked into Hernandez since he was not an angel at Florida. good for him to say that, but I dont believe that matters(mattered) to them at all.

Well I know there was a letter he had written prior to the draft which apparently made the FO want to give him a second chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually like Bleacher Report and their lists/rankings are usually pretty accurate.  But this is the weirdest and most poorly thought out thing I've ever seen.  It's not even like the writer was playing favorites, he's just a moron.

 

Bleacher Report's Top 100 NFL Players: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1607142-br-nfl-1000-top-100-players-overall/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually like Bleacher Report and their lists/rankings are usually pretty accurate.  But this is the weirdest and most poorly thought out thing I've ever seen.  It's not even like the writer was playing favorites, he's just a moron.

 

Bleacher Report's Top 100 NFL Players: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1607142-br-nfl-1000-top-100-players-overall/

 

I don't have time to read all of them. Just leaved through the list. Any specific statements you want to pull out as examples?

 

It's hard to say too much about the rankings without reading the reasoning, but my first thought was that it was nice to see a list that gave adequate respect to positions like guard and fullback, instead of just focusing heavily on the dudes who get fantasy football headlines (qbs, receivers, running backs, and rush ends).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have time to read all of them. Just leaved through the list. Any specific statements you want to pull out as examples?

It's hard to say too much about the rankings without reading the reasoning, but my first thought was that it was nice to see a list that gave adequate respect to positions like guard and fullback, instead of just focusing heavily on the dudes who get fantasy football headlines (qbs, receivers, running backs, and rush ends).

I get including the non-glamorous positions, but they included a lot. But one big example of what I have wrong with the list is that Arian Foster (who the author referred to as an "underdog"), Doug Martin, and Marshawn Lynch were all ranked in the 90s. And all ranked below Shady McCoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say he's making the case that Arian has always ran behind one of the couple best lines in the league and while good, put McCoy on the team and he'll put up more points. He doesn't explicitly mention injury either but Foster is definitely deserving of the label "injury prone" at this point.

 

Whether his ability to scout talent as if judging in a vacuum is good or not, I have no idea.

 

I'd probably take beast mode if I was starting a team for this year (so not really worrying about age implications). Anyone can hit a wide open hole. No one breaks tackles like him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically the guy made up metrics for skills at every position. And every one adds up to 100. And then all players are ranked based on that score. Which makes no sense to me. Positions are naturally on un even playing fields. It's basically saying the best offensive guard is better than the third best QB because his arbitrary number is higher.

And it would make a little more sense if his logic followed what you were saying about potential if RBs ran behind a good line. But if that was his logic, then CJ2K would be high on the list. But he's not even on it.

Also I just realized Cam Newton isn't on it. And neither is Darrelle Revis. And CJ Spiller is somehow number 24.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like ranking Spiller that high. His yards per attempt are superb. Rather give credit to a guy who splits time but nails it when called on than a guy who just gets a lot of volume (which you could argue, given that his RAT isn't that great). Not saying I would, but I could see the argument. I'd probably give Newton a rating around 50-75.

 

There's room for both kinds of lists -- ones that put a ton of weight on positional impact and ones that don't. Given positional impact, there is no way that Watt could be #1 and the top 5 should almost automatically be QBs. No other position has close to the impact on the overall team performance as the QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's room for both kinds of lists -- ones that put a ton of weight on positional impact and ones that don't. Given positional impact, there is no way that Watt could be #1 and the top 5 should almost automatically be QBs. No other position has close to the impact on the overall team performance as the QB.

This nails it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cant wait for Cowboys kickoff tonight. As for Von Miller, how are you going to suspend a guy for smoking something thats fucking legal in the state he plays in? Really?!

 

Weed still an illegal substance by federal law. States can't overrule the federal government (a la the CIvil War). An employer has the right to suspend/fire someone for repeated substance abuse.

 

Just giving the counterargument. Your point is very valid. I think that the federal government is going to squash these legalized states eventually. In normal times, they probably would have already. Just have bigger fish to fry right now with topics like unemployment, sequestration, wrapping up the wars, etc.

 

As a federal government employee they tell you on the first day that it is illegal and not allowed under any circumstances. Even with a doctor's prescription for medicinal marijuana in any state, you will get busted if they test you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are technically "prohormones" that aren't illegal either. A prohormone is for all intents and purposes a steroid, but it only stimulates the body's testosterone creation, not supplements it. Chemists keep changing the chemical formula, which makes it hard for the scientists to keep the substances banned.

 

Doubt anyone busted for roids ever tries to use that as an excuse, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×

AdBlock Detected

spacer.png

We noticed that you're using an adBlocker

Yes, I'll whitelist