Kirby Jackson Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 (edited) I guess that why I think that it is low is because this isn't a ranking of the 32 best QB situations. The Bills would be at or near the bottom if that was the case. It is of the best rosters and the Bills finished with the 13 or 14th best record last year (based on draft position). Is their talent 10 spots worse than where they finished???? The answer is no. The Bills didn't overachieve last year. I think that a ranking in the teens somewhere is more appropriate and with a QB they are (or will be) a top 10 roster IMO. Edited February 12, 2015 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I guess that why I think that it is low is because this isn't a ranking of the 32 best QB situations. The Bills would be at or near the bottom if that was the case. It is of the best rosters and the Bills finished with the 13 or 14th best record last year (based on draft position). Is their talent 10 spots worse than where they finished???? The answer is no. The Bills didn't overachieve last year. if you give QB and roster each big weightings, and you think qb is 30 while roster may be like 14, suddenly 24 doesnt look crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 12, 2015 Author Share Posted February 12, 2015 I'm a big believer in heavily weighting the QB, and as of today the Bills don't really have one. That could change before too long. Â Let's be honest - the Bills were an 8-8 team and would have been annihilated by the Pats if the final game of the season meant anything. why do you think they would have been "annihilated" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 We finished the season tied for the 14th best W-L record, but we're 24th in roster talent? Â Rotoworld is effectively saying that Marrone coached us up 10 spots higher than we deserved based on talent. Â Clearly this is insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 if you give QB and roster each big weightings, and you think qb is 30 while roster may be like 14, suddenly 24 doesnt look crazy. I don't disagree but that really isn't ranking a roster. How it should be done IMO is QB: 10 points, RBs: 10, Pass catchers: 10, DL: 10, OL: 10, LB: 10, secondary: 10, and ST:10. Â That would be ranking a roster. If you scored each position out of 10 you would come up with a score and a ranking. I guess that I will give it a try for the Bills using my method: QB - 1 RB - 4 Pass catchers - 7 OL - 3 DL - 10 LB - 7 secondary - 8 ST - 9 Â That is a 49 out of a possible 80 which would be a little above average but not elite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLynchTrain Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I don't disagree but that really isn't ranking a roster. How it should be done IMO is QB: 10 points, RBs: 10, Pass catchers: 10, DL: 10, OL: 10, LB: 10, secondary: 10, and ST:10. Â That would be ranking a roster. If you scored each position out of 10 you would come up with a score and a ranking. I guess that I will give it a try for the Bills using my method: QB - 1 RB - 4 Pass catchers - 7 OL - 3 DL - 10 LB - 7 secondary - 8 ST - 9 Â That is a 49 out of a possible 80 which would be a little above average but not elite. Â This isn't a bad valuation. However, we all know how important QBs are - if we were really being honest here I'd say I'd make the QB ratio out of 30 for a total of 100. Which would give the Bills here a 49/100 (or a 51/100 if you gave QB 3/30). Either way, its average, and still above #24 in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 (edited) Bills 24th   http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/51972/59/team-needs-and-roster-rankings but the arrow is trending up....laffin   we hold the 19th spot in draft order. thats a more accurate ranking. Edited February 12, 2015 by papazoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I'm surprised they are that high. It's a fantasy football list, where the entire defense is worth pretty much nothing. Top QB, feature RB, star WR/TE is all that matters in FF. Â I haven't drafted a Buffalo player in FF in about ten years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 12, 2015 Author Share Posted February 12, 2015 I'm surprised they are that high. It's a fantasy football list, where the entire defense is worth pretty much nothing. Top QB, feature RB, star WR/TE is all that matters in FF. Â I haven't drafted a Buffalo player in FF in about ten years. where do you see that it's a fantasy football list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 where do you see that it's a fantasy football list? Â They may not call it out as such, but that's what Rotoworld does. I don't know why anyone would care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Landing Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 What bothers me about this list is that it tries (and pretends) to be objective, while attempting a largely subjective task. A team is not merely the sum of its various parts, and if it were, I suspect the Bills would be higher on this list. And, if we ever manage to get our act together, we will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I don't disagree but that really isn't ranking a roster. How it should be done IMO is QB: 10 points, RBs: 10, Pass catchers: 10, DL: 10, OL: 10, LB: 10, secondary: 10, and ST:10. Â That would be ranking a roster. If you scored each position out of 10 you would come up with a score and a ranking. I guess that I will give it a try for the Bills using my method: QB - 1 RB - 4 Pass catchers - 7 OL - 3 DL - 10 LB - 7 secondary - 8 ST - 9 Â That is a 49 out of a possible 80 which would be a little above average but not elite. and your system here does weight qb a bit heavier by putting his worth up against 5 OL, or 4-5 in the secondary etc.... so its a good possible option. you have to weight qb extra though, i think we can agree on that. just how heavily? whole lot of opinion and open for debate. id probably slide our roster up a few spots, but not DRASTICALLY until i see a qb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 (edited) Not surprised or offended. Â I can see an outsider considering: We have no QB. We have one legitimate RB on the team, and he's now old to the point of limited use, our WR corps is young and unproven, our line is a mess, an average at best TE with no depth behind him. On defense we might lose our 2nd best DE, we might have depth problems on the line depending on who we lose, and what system we choose... we have a good defense, but our offense is a mess at the moment... plus we haven't made the playoffs in 15 years, so that goes against us as well. Â As a Bills fan, I'm not nearly as pessimistic as the above, but I understand it. Edited February 12, 2015 by Dorkington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Landing Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 and your system here does weight qb a bit heavier by putting his worth up against 5 OL, or 4-5 in the secondary etc.... so its a good possible option. you have to weight qb extra though, i think we can agree on that. just how heavily? whole lot of opinion and open for debate. id probably slide our roster up a few spots, but not DRASTICALLY until i see a qb But, isn't the point of such a list to evaluate the overall strength of talent on each team? We all know that QB play (and coaching, for that matter) will drag down a team's effectiveness. But, Orton's or EJ's shortcomings don't make Watkins' any less of a player-- they just drag down his effectiveness on this team. Â So, what was the point of this list again? Is it just a power ranking? Or is there some deeper point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 But, isn't the point of such a list to evaluate the overall strength of talent on each team? We all know that QB play (and coaching, for that matter) will drag down a team's effectiveness. But, Orton's or EJ's shortcomings don't make Watkins' any less of a player-- they just drag down his effectiveness on this team. Â So, what was the point of this list again? Is it just a power ranking? Or is there some deeper point? i guess power ranking minus coaching? i dont know. its a random off season list ranking 53 man rosters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PS 56 Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. In my opinion Rotoworld threw together a bunch of nonsense to fill space. There is no real understanding of any teams' roster in that article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Why does every ranking seem to rank the Bills between 22 and 28, regardless of subject? Because without a QB that's pretty much where they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Landing Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 i guess power ranking minus coaching? i dont know. its a random off season list ranking 53 man rosters. It's a long offseason... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 and your system here does weight qb a bit heavier by putting his worth up against 5 OL, or 4-5 in the secondary etc.... so its a good possible option. you have to weight qb extra though, i think we can agree on that. just how heavily? whole lot of opinion and open for debate. id probably slide our roster up a few spots, but not DRASTICALLY until i see a qb Yeah, that was what I was trying to accomplish. The QB is as important as any position group. What is more important a QB or a CB? The answer is QB. What is more important a QB or a secondary? That is where I am saying equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 (edited) why do you think they would have been "annihilated" Because a) the Pats are arguably the best team in the league and far better than the Bills; b) the Pats have far better coaches; and c) the Bills are just about always annihilated by them in Foxborough. They hadn't won there since 2000. Edited February 12, 2015 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts