for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Rank positions according to importance

huygens20 : 12:26 pm
1. Qb/ edge
2. DE
3. OT
4 WR
5. CB
6. DT
7. IOL
8 FS
9 TE
10 MLB
11 SS
12 RB
13K/punt
14 olb/wlb

What say you?
IMO ...  
Beer Man : 1:18 pm : link
OL,TE,LB,ER,DT,QB,PK,RB,FS,CB

I assume you mean in importance of need.
QB  
rasbutant : 2:02 pm : link
playmaker.
.  
Ira : 2:34 pm : link
1. QB
2. OT
3. DE
4 CB
5. TE
6. DT
7. WR
8 FS
9 RB
10 IOL
11 SS
12 KP
13 Returners/ST
13K/punt
14 olb/wlb
OT  
OT
OT
OT
QB
FS
CB
MLB
C

The rest aren't important. :)
Depends on the scheme. If you're the Patriots:  
SHO'NUFF : 2:44 pm : link
1. Bill Belicheck
2. The equipment manager/ball boy
3. The finance guru who signs the checks for TB12.
4. Yet to be discovered method of cheating.
5. Yet to be discovered method of cheating.
6. Yet to be discovered method of cheating.
7. QB
oh, and #8  
SHO'NUFF : 2:46 pm : link
The fucking ridiculous coaching decisions made by the other team to piss away a sure-fire Super Bowl championship.
RE: IMO ...  
djm : 3:47 pm : link
In comment 13442988 Beer Man said:
Quote:
OL,TE,LB,ER,DT,QB,PK,RB,FS,CB

I assume you mean in importance of need.


You think the QB is 6th????? Cmon.

OL (T or Guard)  
PatersonPlank : 7:10 pm : link
DT
LB
RB
TE
QB
I'd say the OP's list  
Cenotaph : 8:46 pm : link
is fair, assuming we're talking a general list of positional importance. However, there's a lot of other factors that go into it, including scheme and where you have other talent on the team. For example, while you may have a position like OLB or SS low, if you have a great player at that position (think Collins), it lessons the need at positions around them (FS/MLB). And certain schemes put more value on a NT (3-4), or a TE (Saints with Graham), which may be lower in general but can shine in certain schemes. Era also matters -modern passing game values DE/OT and CB/WR highly, but 80s era had high value on RB, DT, LB etc when more run oriented. Even DT, you have to consider a pass rusher vs a run stuffer like Snacks - and again, have a truly great player can change the value.

It's hard to argue with QB at the top. After that, it's probably best to think of it as tiers or groups than a true rank. DE/Edge and OT tend to be after QB, with WR and CB very close in modern NFL. In the modern game, I'd probably say most teams like to have at least one S (FS or SS), TE, OG, MLB and DT in the next tier - but again depends on scheme/talent etc. Then I'd say RB/OLB/FB/OC, 2nd S or DT in 4-3. I'd say that general ranking holds fairly well for the way the giants are set up, other teams certainly put more weight on LB, TE, RB than we have recently.
Back to the Corner