Big Turk Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 4 minutes ago, T master said: Well my answer would have been different if the OP would have said position but he said positions plural so that was my reason for my reply, but to reply to you if a QB is running for his life or on his back every play no matter if you are Brady or Manning it won't matter now maybe a Favre or Rogers maybe but a pocket passer is doomed if they have no line to protect them just my humble opinion ... But that's just not true. Luck had terrible lines which caused him to retire due to injuries sustained because of them but he made the playoffs every year. Put this old tired narrative to bed. And close the door on it so it can't come back out.
Giuseppe Tognarelli Posted November 13, 2019 Author Posted November 13, 2019 6 minutes ago, NewEra said: K/P #2. Stopped there Kickers win games though.
BuffaloBillies Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 QB LT C RT DE 1 DT 1 CB 1 MLB SS WR 1 LG RG CB 2 DE 2 DT 2 WR 2 TE FS RB 1 OLB OLB WR 3 RB 2 K LS P Cheerleaders
row_33 Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 (edited) 32 minutes ago, matter2003 said: Maybe its not as much a priority as people who don't know football think? yes, coaches and GM insist it is a top priority whenever asked I don’t really care enough to delve into the seven levels of deception during sports interviews 19 minutes ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said: Kickers win games though. Patriots have made it a top priority to have a great kicker for most of the Dynasty Edited November 13, 2019 by row_33 1
Billzgobowlin Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 Not all players at all positions are the same. Manning in his prime is better with a worse line than anyone in the past 5 years. If it's not Manning you need to look at Oline first. This goes to all positions. None are an island
Happy Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 OL DL LB QB . . . Safeties WR RB TE CB K/P Top four are significantly more important than the rest.
HOUSE Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 Oh no, you need the BPA. Its like the bible NO PRIORITIES, otherwise you will die 1 1
hjnick Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 ok, let's change it up a bit... if you are building a team and how you would want to allocate *greatness* 24 Players on the field (both sides of ball): Offense: QB, RB, LT, RT, OG, OG, C, WR1, TE, WR2, (your option)last spot could be FB, WR3, RB2, TE2 Defense: DT1, DE1, DE2, MLB1, OLB1, OLB2, Safety1, Safety2, CB1, CB2, (your option 4/3 or 3/4 DEF)last spot DT2 or MLB2 Special Teams: K, P Using the Bell Curve: Elite (1) / All Pro (2) / Solid Starter (3) / Below Avg Player (4) / Barely NFL Caliber (5) / Not Good (6) (The number is just so you can tell if someone is that level, not how many of each for that position). Now, for Every Elite player you have, you have to match with Not Good, All Pro with Barely NFL and solid starter with Below avg player. Example: remember adds up to 24: 2/3/7/7/3/2 For me: Breakdown per position 2 / 3 / 7 / 7 / 3 / 2 QB 1 RB 4 LT 2 RT 3 OG 4 OG 5 C 3 WR1 2 WR2 3 *WR3 6 TE 4 K 4 P 4 4/3 DEF DT1 3 *DT2 5 DE1 1 DE2 3 MLB1 3 OLB1 4 OLB2 5 Safety1 4 Safety2 6 CB1 2 CB2 3 This was interesting... My OLine is the best, but I have an elite QB that hopefully will make some good decisions with an All Pro WR. And on defense I went with an elite DE to pressure the QB and an All pro CB to lock down other teams best WR.but my linebackers, safeties, and special teams suffered. 1 1
yungmack Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 Follow the old saw that "you build from front to back, from inside to outside." 1
Royale with Cheese Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 3 hours ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said: I've been giving this some thought. If you were starting from scratch with a football team, where would you begin as GM? Would you go for a quarterback first? Build the lines and go from there? Load up on skill position players and hope for the best? My initial thought is that I'd prioritize positions in this order: OL K/P QB DL CB WR TE RB LB S I think a team with a dominant offensive line and kicking game can get a lot done in terms of ball control and dictating the pace of games, so that's why I would make sure I have those in place before I insert a young quarterback. I could be widely panned as wrong in my thinking, but I'm curious as to what philosophies we have on the board in terms of positional importance. Ultimately, it's about Ws. You have kicker and punter as your 2nd priority?
Just Joshin' Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 2 hours ago, NewEra said: K/P #2. Stopped there I was wondering why it took so long for someone to call this out. Makes the whole analysis suspect.
K-9 Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 (edited) I still subscribe to the Polian model, with one exception: I’d put a higher priority on a franchise CB over a franchise RB, given the changes in the game in the last generation. I wouldn’t be surprised if Polian has also evolved. Anyway, his order of positional importance as he outlined in the early 90s: QB - for obvious reasons; the most important position on the field DE - to pressure the other team’s most important player OT - to protect your own most important player RB - to protect leads and control clock and take pressure of your most important player WR - to provide a reliable “go to” option for your most important player Substitute that franchise CB for the RB and I still agree with BP. And we should always understand that building a team is never a linear process. By that I mean you should never bypass bluechip talent at one position to satisfy a need at another by taking a less talented player, regardless of position. Edited November 13, 2019 by K-9
BringBackOrton Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: Close to my list: 1. QB 2. Pass Rusher 3. #1 CB 4. LT 5. #1 WR I would also take elite talent anywhere though. You need stars to win. This is the correct list.
Giuseppe Tognarelli Posted November 13, 2019 Author Posted November 13, 2019 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Just Joshin' said: I was wondering why it took so long for someone to call this out. Makes the whole analysis suspect. Obviously, I disagree. Another poster made the point that the Patriots have historically made it a point to have a great kicker. I think it's "criminally" underlooked. Kickers often have a greater impact on the outcome of games than any other single position, save quarterback, in my opinion. The difference between a great kicker and a "whatever's left" kicker is probably 2 games per year, I would think. Edited November 13, 2019 by Giuseppe Tognarelli
BringBackOrton Posted November 13, 2019 Posted November 13, 2019 2 hours ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said: Kickers win games though. This has to be a joke.
Giuseppe Tognarelli Posted November 13, 2019 Author Posted November 13, 2019 Just now, BringBackOrton said: This has to be a joke. I don't understand this comment. If the Bills had, for example, Justin Tucker on Sunday, they would be 7-2. 1
Recommended Posts