NFL Top 100 Players - 2017 (Cousins, Reed, Norman and Williams so far)

[Conn]

5 hours ago, bolt2skins said:

 

Damn, I was just starting to feel comfortable around here....

So, no player critique allowed? Phillip Rivers wishes they had that rule on the Chargers forum............

 

All critiques must pass through QA before we allow them.

 

 

[elkabong82]

2 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

 

Well, we can definitely agree on the fact that the Skins were idiots when it came to him. When I look at the great QBs we have in the league, most of them get to where they are at because they have had the same offense installed for years. Yes, the talent is there for the great QBs but it takes a good mix of talent, offensive scheme and continuity for a QB to truly launch into greatness. Stability is something he's getting right now, with his O-line, and with Gruden, and hopefully we see a big jump in numbers and 4th quarter clutch plays. If Kirk goes out and has a top 5 season, which is possible, then I think the Skins actually did the right thing and rewarded Kirk in his best moment, but value wise, they should have paid him after 2015. 

 

Your post only works due to the benefit of hindsight.

 

In the moment, Kirk's first season there were legitmiate concerns at the end. He played well, but did benefit from an easier schedule down the stretch, plus he had 12 a season of very good play as a starter. Add to that the team had just come to terms that season with moving on from RG3, and it's plain as day why they decided to tag and have Kirk prove it for a full season. They knew what it would mean to the contract if they waited and he did well. Everyone knew. The Skins simply decided it was worth the extra 3-5 million per year, and the increased guaranteed salary, to have certainty at the position by waiting a year, than to jump the gun and be wrong, which would have been a far more expensive mistake and would hurt roster building too. That isn't the team being idiots. It's them being reserved because they literally just had to move on from a major mistake at QB that cost them significant resources. 

[Koolblue13]

I said this in another nonkirk thread and probably shouldn't say it here either, but we handled it all wrong. Hes going to get paid a lot. Two years after, it wont seem that high and its his only contract. I dont know if hes top five, but hes definitely top half and thats fine. Just ****ing pay him and move the **** on.

[dyst]

Agree with others. After his first good season I can kinda see the Skins lowballing and not offering a LTD but after last year, they should have jumped on it. 

 

Not sure if they arent offering enough or Kirk maybe is being unrealistic but this hurts the team more than it hurts him.

 

At this point he's proven it. Unless they are waiting for him to fail this year just to say "aha, see we told you".

 

edit: wrong thread, sorry. Fact that he's on the top 100 again, speaks volumes. 

[Redskins Reparations]

Wrong thread

[Tsailand]

On 5/18/2017 at 1:41 PM, Burgundy Yoda said:

I'm not sure how much of it is his agent playing hardball, which is kind of what Scot was insinuating in his interview. 

 

After 2015, Kirk offered to sign for three years at 19.5M/year.  That's the opposite of hardball.

 

Wouldn't surprise me if his agent was against the offer.

 

 

[Conn]

Now that we've arrived at "NFL Top 100" time again, I must remind everyone, as I do every year, that the methodology for the list is moronic and basically useless. They literally just have a group of players write down their top 20 peers in order, and then tally the results. This means players they are on the same team as, in the same division as, or played against and studied film on that year are far more likely to make the list, along with guys all over the national media. So it's hardly scientific or all-encompassing. I'll add that reporters always have a hard time finding players that were given the opportunity to "vote", too, so it's impossible to know how big the sample size is in the first place (but it seems small). 

 

Carry on.

[TheGreatBuzz]

34 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Now that we've arrived at "NFL Top 100" time again, I must remind everyone, as I do every year, that the methodology for the list is moronic and basically useless. They literally just have a group of players write down their top 100 peers in order, and then tally the results. This means players they are on the same team as, in the same division as, or played against and studied film on that year are far more likely to make the list, along with guys all over the national media. So it's hardly scientific or all-encompassing. I'll add that reporters always have a hard time finding players that were given the opportunity to "vote", too, so it's impossible to know how big the sample size is in the first place (but it seems small). 

 

Carry on.

It really is just another thing to give the fans to talk abiut during the dreaded off season.  No more, no less.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

43 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Now that we've arrived at "NFL Top 100" time again, I must remind everyone, as I do every year, that the methodology for the list is moronic and basically useless. They literally just have a group of players write down their top 100 peers in order...

 

Top 20 players, not top 100...

[CommanderDOOM]

They do a nice job imo although I disagree with the populace in that a Qb can be the best player(besides SB) in the league when everything he does is dependent on others..

[Conn]

19 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Top 20 players, not top 100...

 

Right, thank you. I'll edit that, my mistake. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

8 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Right, thank you. I'll edit that, my mistake. 

 

Eh, not that important, I just have an accuracy fetish lol...everything else you said was spot on

[Conn]

12 minutes ago, TheShredSkinz said:

They do a nice job imo although I disagree with the populace in that a Qb can be the best player(besides SB) in the league when everything he does is dependent on others..

 

The only position you could reasonably argue this does not apply to is man-to-man CB. If they just shut down their guy across from them, it doesn't really matter (to their assignment) what anyone else on the field does, at first glance, during the play. You can't really say that about any other position, including QB like you said. But in reality its not even true for the specific breed of CB I described because its obvious that no one on earth can lock a guy down indefinitely, a few seconds is all they have in them. So pass rush (the interplay between the OL/DL) giving the QB less time is extremely important to their jobs. That's more than half the players on the field effecting the CB's job on any given play, arguably similar to a QB. So I don't really see how it's a valid point, it's true for everyone on the field. It's why advanced metrics for football are mostly misleading or at best incomplete, especially compared to a more individual, time-stable sport like baseball or arguably basketball.

[TSO]

5 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Eh, not that important, I just have an accuracy fetish lol...everything else you said was spot on

 

It's kiiiiind of important (I know you said not "that" important, just adding here) because it does add a teeny weeny bit of value to an otherwise totally useless, as @ConnSKINS26 pointed out, list. 

 

It means that each player that makes the top 100 was on enough top 20 lists by individual players to do so. So there are players out there who think Cousins, Reed, Norman and Trent are top 20 players in the entire NFL. Might only be guys on our team doing that but, hey, they're picking them out of the rest of our guys.  

[CommanderDOOM]

16 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

The only position you could reasonably argue this does not apply to is man-to-man CB. If they just shut down their guy across from them, it doesn't really matter (to their assignment) what anyone else on the field does, at first glance, during the play. You can't really say that about any other position, including QB like you said. But in reality its not even true for the specific breed of CB I described because its obvious that no one on earth can lock a guy down indefinitely, a few seconds is all they have in them. So pass rush (the interplay between the OL/DL) giving the QB less time is extremely important to their jobs. That's more than half the players on the field effecting the CB's job on any given play, arguably similar to a QB. So I don't really see how it's a valid point, it's true for everyone on the field. It's why advanced metrics for football are mostly misleading or at best incomplete, especially compared to a more individual, time-stable sport like baseball or arguably basketball.

 

Qb's are just more dependent than any other players. When you see a guy dodging defenders, running for TD's , and throwing darts then I'd call him possibly the best. Cb's have to man up on Wr's and tackle rb's and te's. Those same Te's, rb's, and wr's have to beat their guy, block, and catch the ball while a guy a all over them, take the hits, and run away from dudes. OLmen and DL battle on every down. IMO, the rb and the lbers are the best players on the field with all they have to do on it.

The QB is like the king on a chess board, the most important but also limited in talent.

[Conn]

51 minutes ago, TheShredSkinz said:

 

Qb's are just more dependent than any other players. When you see a guy dodging defenders, running for TD's , and throwing darts then I'd call him possibly the best. Cb's have to man up on Wr's and tackle rb's and te's. Those same Te's, rb's, and wr's have to beat their guy, block, and catch the ball while a guy a all over them, take the hits, and run away from dudes. OLmen and DL battle on every down. IMO, the rb and the lbers are the best players on the field with all they have to do on it.

The QB is like the king on a chess board, the most important but also limited in talent.

 

If all you care about are physical attributes and accomplishments play-to-play, then maybe. Mentally, what the QB does every single down before and after the snap dictates every other player's actions, directly or indirectly. You could argue that the actual throw is almost the least important part of what any good QB does every down, once they've passed a certain threshold of skill/competence in terms of arm strength and accuracy. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

Eh, not that important, I just have an accuracy fetish lol...everything else you said was spot on

Well, if you're going to have a fetish, I guess that's as good of one as any. 

 

4 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

It's kiiiiind of important (I know you said not "that" important, just adding here) because it does add a teeny weeny bit of value to an otherwise totally useless, as @ConnSKINS26 pointed out, list. 

 

It means that each player that makes the top 100 was on enough top 20 lists by individual players to do so. So there are players out there who think Cousins, Reed, Norman and Trent are top 20 players in the entire NFL. Might only be guys on our team doing that but, hey, they're picking them out of the rest of our guys.  

Cooley was washing at least in his time it was only th pro bowl players who voted.  I really do wish th would make it more public who votes and when.  

 

Another thing cooley noted (which makes sense) is that ther are a lot of players who might be very good that the players don't know, because unless you have a reason to study film on a guy, how would you actually know who's good or not?

 

the example was for Sherff, who Cooley said might actually be a top 100 player at RG, but who would know that?  The 20-is DL players he goes against throughout the year?  Would any offensive player or even defensive secondary guy really know?  Probably not.

 

he used this as an example for all players, not just to say he thinks Sherff should have been voted in.

[NickyJ]

Well, in that case I won't be upset if Will Compton doesn't make the list. He's still top 10 talent, people just don't know it. Yet.

[Tsailand]

6 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

the methodology for the list is moronic and basically useless

 

If they were serious about it, they would only survey the following positions: QB, C, ILB, S.  And only players with 7+ seasons of NFL experience. And they would only evaluate conference opponents who play on the other side of the ball.

[CommanderDOOM]

4 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

If all you care about are physical attributes and accomplishments play-to-play, then maybe. Mentally, what the QB does every single down before and after the snap dictates every other player's actions, directly or indirectly. You could argue that the actual throw is almost the least important part of what any good QB does every down, once they've passed a certain threshold of skill/competence in terms of arm strength and accuracy. 

 

LB's don't have pre and post snap reads?? Most defenders have keys to determine their coverages and/or assignments. The really great Lbs seem to go thru the tri effortlessly. Compton does it but just isn't fast enough a lot times to make the play. Qb's aren't the only ones reading the field but guys like Rodgers can also move to make something out of nothing, avoid free blitzers, drop dimes, and hurt the D with his legs. He is the only QB Imo in the debate for overall best football player with his all-around skill set. It's a debate that could go on forever. Brady gets alot of love but who's to say that the system they have doesn't have a lot to do with his success?

 

 

11 minutes ago, Tsailand said:

 

If they were serious about it, they would only survey the following positions: QB, C, ILB, S.  And only players with 7+ seasons of NFL experience. And they would only evaluate conference opponents who play on the other side of the ball.

 

Rb, Wr, DE, OLB, DT?? Jerry Rice, Jim Brown, Lawrence Taylor, Reggie White, JJ Watt/Deacon Jones, Barry Sanders........

[HTTRDynasty]

Speaking of top player lists, has anyone checked out the NFL1000 project on Bleacher Report.  I've always taken anything posted on BR with a grain of salt, but I was more interested in this project of theirs than I usually am.  This is how it works:

 

 

Quote

 

It's been an amazing journey—the ability to assemble a team of 17 scouts to analyze and grade every player in every game has given us (and hopefully you, dear reader) unique insight into how football is played, coached and schemed.

 

Throughout the year, we've done comprehensive write-ups every week with our player grades and explanations of those grades. But for the regular-season finale, and in the work-up to the postseason (because we're not nearly done yet), it's time to hand out the awards for the best players overall. We have come up with cumulative grades, and you can now see which players we deemed to be the best at their positions and the best overall.

 

Our top two overall players show the extreme value of quarterback protection. Washington Redskins left tackle Trent Williams was graded as the best overall player, though he missed four games with a league-mandated suspension. There is no blocker in the NFL with Williams' combination of strength, agility and meanness.

...

 

As it has been through the season, there is no predetermined narrative with these grades. No mysterious "clutch factor." No tweaked-out quarterback ratings that defy explanation. Our grades are based on pure scouting, and lots of it. We grade the key criteria for each position based on a series of attributes and add in a score for positional importance.

 

In the case of a tie, our scouts ask, "Which player would I want on my team?" and adjust accordingly.

 

Is it a subjective process? Of course—that's what scouting is, and as we like to say, ties are no fun.

 

Each player is evaluated and graded by our crack team of scouts, who possess more than 100 combined years of experience in playing, front-office work, coaching and media. Cian Fahey, John Middlekauff, Marcus Mosher, Mark Schofield, Duke Manyweather, Ethan Young, Joe Goodberry, Justis Mosqueda, Charles McDonald, Zach Kruse, Derrik Klassen, Jerod Brown, Ian Wharton, Kyle Posey, Mark Bullock, Chuck Zodda and Doug Farrar have watched tape for months to bring you these grades.

 

Here are the final NFL1000 player grades for the 2016 NFL regular season.

 

 

 

There are some questionable rankings in there, but it's not a terrible list.  However, you would do well to ignore the QB list.  Cian Fahey (the scout assigned to QBs) is a known Kirk Cousins hater, and there is no one in the media who has more credibility to lose than him if Kirk is ever regarded as a perennial top QB.

[TheGreatBuzz]

Just gpt the alert on my phone that Normam came in at #59.

[HTTRDynasty]

Yea, that's a fair ranking for Norman.  Apparently, there are 5 CB's ranked ahead of him, which is right around the range he should be in.  We already know Janoris Jenkins was ranked ahead of him.  If I had to guess, the other 4 guys are Patrick Peterson, Richard Sherman, Marcus Peters, and Aquib Talib. If you notice though, most of those guys had much better front 7's than he did last year.  

[dyst]

Trent Williams will be on that list too. 4 guys on this list for this team is HUGE. We might have had 4 total the past decade and now it's all in the same year. Baby steps.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Updated...

 

 

6 hours ago, dyst said:

Trent Williams will be on that list too. 4 guys on this list for this team is HUGE. We might have had 4 total the past decade and now it's all in the same year. Baby steps.

 

Actually we've usually had 3 or 4 players on the list over the past 5 years. Prior to that? Ghost town lol...