Jump to content

Rosenthal: True QB value rankings from 1-35


Recommended Posts

I couldn’t figure out a link, it is in the NFL App. I guess what he is attempting to do is rank each QB based on ability and contract cost. Not sure what relevance that has. He sure hates Josh Allen, ranks him 23, right after Gardner Minshew.

  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chris heff said:

I couldn’t figure out a link, it is in the NFL App. I guess what he is attempting to do is rank each QB based on ability and contract cost. Not sure what relevance that has. He sure hates Josh Allen, ranks him 23, right after Gardner Minshew.

 

Literally the first link on google. 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001108258/article/nfl-qb-value-rankings-who-do-you-want-most-at-current-cost

  • Haha (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DFT said:

Greg Rosenthal’s reasoning for some of these rankings is just adorable... 

does he work for PFF? 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would put Josh ahead of the following:

Carr - Contract and inconsistent

Big Ben - Contract and injury

Goff - Contract and inconsistent

Stafford - Contract and injury

Baker - Had an off year and just not showing he's a leader

That would put him at 17. I have him tied with Darnold.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SirAndrew said:

Josh Allen has a chance to prove himself

big time this season, no need to be all hurt over a low ranking.

Wasn’t hurt at all. I found the premise to be absurd regardless of Allen’s ranking. You can rank a player on ability, you can rank contract value, but what is the point of merging those two things? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SirAndrew said:

Josh Allen has a chance to prove himself

big time this season, no need to be all hurt over a low ranking.

 

One might argue that Josh could use this as fuel to drive him, but they’d be wrong, IMO.  I think Josh is already fully self-driven and I think this would be like water off a duck. I hope I come to love the player as much as the guy! 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I care less that Josh is that low than Baker being that high. 10?? Given last years results I don't think you can really separate Josh, Baker or Darnold all that much. To have him at 10 is ridiculous. 

5 minutes ago, GreggTX said:

23rd sounds about right. His inaccuracy, fumbling, inability to handle pressure, etc always get a free pass from his admirers. I'm just hoping he can get it together finally in 2020.

Yea 23 is fine. I think the difference between 23 and 18 on any of these lists is very narrow. 

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chris heff said:

Wasn’t hurt at all. I found the premise to be absurd regardless of Allen’s ranking. You can rank a player on ability, you can rank contract value, but what is the point of merging those two things? 

I get that, and thanks for posting the link because I like these type of articles. I just meant that some people tend to overreact to these type of things. I really like Allen’s potential, but I wouldn’t expect him ranked higher than 20 something by any non-Bills fan. If he progresses the way he should, there’s no way he won’t move up in these type of rankings, even if the writer isn’t great. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dopey said:

I would put Josh ahead of the following:

Carr - Contract and inconsistent

Big Ben - Contract and injury

Goff - Contract and inconsistent

Stafford - Contract and injury

Baker - Had an off year and just not showing he's a leader

That would put him at 17. I have him tied with Darnold.

....and Tannehill, I would rank him based on last year's improvements somewhere in the 16-17 range. I agree he should be side by side with Darnold. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...