Posts: 1,860
Threads: 1,860
Joined: May 2013
Reputation:
0
Packers at #23
Lions at #21
Bears are surprisingly at #9
... and our Minnesota Vikings are at #5.
I don't understand how the Bears are ranked that high, which has them ahead of teams like the Chargers, Saints, Bengals, and a few others. The Bears had a terrible WR corps last year and they've added some talent to their skill positions, but they seem really overrated. Allen Robinson is coming off a torn ACL and didn't exactly have a great season before that. Trey Burton is an athletic TE, but he's never been a starter in his career. I like the WR the Bears drafted (Anthony Miller) and Taylor Gabriel has speed for days... but this seems like a lot of potential and not any type of proven production to get a top 10 ranking.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
Packers at #23
Lions at #21
Bears are surprisingly at #9
... and our Minnesota Vikings are at #5.
I don't understand how the Bears are ranked that high, which has them ahead of teams like the Chargers, Saints, Bengals, and a few others. The Bears had a terrible WR corps last year and they've added some talent to their skill positions, but they seem really overrated. Allen Robinson is coming off a torn ACL and didn't exactly have a great season before that. Trey Burton is an athletic TE, but he's never been a starter in his career. I like the WR the Bears drafted (Anthony Miller) and Taylor Gabriel has speed for days... but this seems like a lot of potential and not any type of proven production to get a top 10 ranking.
Media is bullish on Chicago because of what Nagy will bring. Or could bring, we'll have to see if on the field.
Kansas City? Nothing against Mahomes, but if your arsenal is driven by a QB who has yet to throw a TD in the NFL...I'm not buying.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
Kansas City? Nothing against Mahomes, but if your arsenal is driven by a QB who has yet to throw a TD in the NFL...I'm not buying.
Agreed. All they talk about is the kid's arm strength, which is unique. But when did that ever matter in the success of a QB? It never does, but the media has mad love for it. I will say this, he's a really great young man. Very easy to root for, super polite. Works hard. I'm rooting for him, but he's got a TON to prove.
Not how I see it. Really KC??? The Bears are a reach. Down on the Pack...lol. That made it worth a look.
Quote: @StickyBun said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Kansas City? Nothing against Mahomes, but if your arsenal is driven by a QB who has yet to throw a TD in the NFL...I'm not buying.
Agreed. All they talk about is the kid's arm strength, which is unique. But when did that ever matter in the success of a QB? It never does, but the media has mad love for it. I will say this, he's a really great young man. Very easy to root for, super polite. Works hard. I'm rooting for him, but he's got a TON to prove.
The article literally says that they aren't including the QBs contribution, OLine or Scheme. They are trying to rank how good the skill positions are compared to each other, and how much they will help a young QB.
Quote: @medaille said:
@ StickyBun said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Kansas City? Nothing against Mahomes, but if your arsenal is driven by a QB who has yet to throw a TD in the NFL...I'm not buying.
Agreed. All they talk about is the kid's arm strength, which is unique. But when did that ever matter in the success of a QB? It never does, but the media has mad love for it. I will say this, he's a really great young man. Very easy to root for, super polite. Works hard. I'm rooting for him, but he's got a TON to prove.
The article literally says that they aren't including the QBs contribution, OLine or Scheme. They are trying to rank how good the skill positions are compared to each other, and how much they will help a young QB.
Yep, my bad for not communicating in which context I meant: Mahomes is always talked about, outside this particular article, for his arm strength. Ad nauseam.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
Kansas City? Nothing against Mahomes, but if your arsenal is driven by a QB who has yet to throw a TD in the NFL...I'm not buying.
It's just ranking the offensive skill players and doesn't account for QB, offensive line, coaching, etc...
However, I probably wouldn't have had Kansas City #1. Kareem Hunt, Travis Kelce, and Tyreek Hill is a great trio, but I would put a few others ahead of that group, especially if we're looking at WR2 and RB2's for some of these teams.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Kansas City? Nothing against Mahomes, but if your arsenal is driven by a QB who has yet to throw a TD in the NFL...I'm not buying.
It's just ranking the offensive skill players and doesn't account for QB, offensive line, coaching, etc...
However, I probably wouldn't have had Kansas City #1. Kareem Hunt, Travis Kelce, and Tyreek Hill is a great trio, but I would put a few others ahead of that group, especially if we're looking at WR2 and RB2's for some of these teams.
I can't be expected to actually READ that shit. :-) With the intention fully understood, I wouldn't have KC there either. Tyreek Hill is one-dimensional. I don't get the Giants either. Sure, the receivers are good, but Barkley is a rookie. Who's to say he isn't Trent Richardson? I'd have the Vikings, Steelers and Falcons above both of them.
|
