I know most don’t care about this list (including me... just happened to have the NFL Network on tv but wasn’t paying attention to what was on) but figured I’d post the info for those that do.
I expect him to be Top 10 again after this season.
By the way, I’m a big Taylor Lewan fan after his bit. & #128514;
Tough to put the guy in the top 10 when he missed almost an entire season. Arguably, 77 is generous because of that.
mdgiantsfan - I’m pretty sure they’re based on last year.
Pretty sure both Nicks and Cruz’s injuries were worse than Beckham’s.
But like you said, we’ll see. I’m putting my $ on OBJ tho.
Yes there has been.
Quote:
76 players that are better than Odell at any time in the history of this league.
Yes there has been.
Although I’m sure a good amount of hyperbole was being used there that’s actually a debatable point. Remember, this guy has started off at a historic pace. So I’m not so sure it’s as open and shut as you say Montley. It’s probably impossible to really figure out but I don’t think Phil’s statement is as ‘out there’ as it sounds. Just MO.
And power rankings....
Mind blown,
Ha... was thinking the same thing. Have no use (anymore anyway) for the Top 100 lists, personally, but other than that my tv stays on the NFL Network.
Or maybe people love to watch the actual football instead of the fluff and nonsense that networks spit out 24 hours a day.
Quote:
It's astonishing how many people who hate football watch football. That's not sarcasm, I'm really amazed by it.
Or maybe people love to watch the actual football instead of the fluff and nonsense that networks spit out 24 hours a day.
What do you want them to show in May? Just reruns of old games? That wouldn't necessarily be bad, but it would just bore a different set of the audience instead.
Quote:
but are there really 76 players in this league that are objectively 'better' than Odell Beckham? Jr. Put another way, are there 76 other guys people would pick before him?
Tough to put the guy in the top 10 when he missed almost an entire season. Arguably, 77 is generous because of that.
That's the point... if it's strictly about 2017, then how can you put him on the list at all when he missed 3/4 of the regular season? So, past performance and future projection clearly plays a role... in that case, does anyone really think a healthy OBJ (even with the ankle) is the 77th best player in football? IOW, if the entire league were to be re-drafted, he'd be a late third round pick? I don't think so...
Anyway, I'm not upset by it, I just have trouble reconciling its purpose.
Quote:
In comment 13957412 regulator said:
Quote:
but are there really 76 players in this league that are objectively 'better' than Odell Beckham? Jr. Put another way, are there 76 other guys people would pick before him?
Tough to put the guy in the top 10 when he missed almost an entire season. Arguably, 77 is generous because of that.
That's the point... if it's strictly about 2017, then how can you put him on the list at all when he missed 3/4 of the regular season? So, past performance and future projection clearly plays a role... in that case, does anyone really think a healthy OBJ (even with the ankle) is the 77th best player in football? IOW, if the entire league were to be re-drafted, he'd be a late third round pick? I don't think so...
Anyway, I'm not upset by it, I just have trouble reconciling its purpose.
Its:
*Off season filler
*A highlight show
*A chance for players to gush about their buddies on other teams and probably make a buck or two for the interview
Actually it isn’t . It’s “supposed “ to be for this upcoming season. It’s a crap show anyways
Quote:
In comment 13957609 christian said:
Quote:
It's astonishing how many people who hate football watch football. That's not sarcasm, I'm really amazed by it.
Or maybe people love to watch the actual football instead of the fluff and nonsense that networks spit out 24 hours a day.
What do you want them to show in May? Just reruns of old games? That wouldn't necessarily be bad, but it would just bore a different set of the audience instead.
Yes, I do want them to show old games. Thats what they used to do. I want to learn about NFL history. My favorite team and players as well as others. What set of audience is that going to bore? The set that loves watching draft prospects on the red carpet, Thursday Night Football, Carrie Underwoods legs, and fantasy football stats? Eff that audience set. They are the reason the league is headed down the toilet anyway.
I will remind every lineman we play this year, while I'm whipping their ass, that they didn't vote for me. Blame it on the Top 100. So don't ask me "what's your problem man" you should already know. When the list comes back y'all hands gonna shake when you think of me...
- Damon Harrison Sr. (@snacks) May 8, 2018
All y'all gots to PAY! - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 13957631 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 13957609 christian said:
Quote:
It's astonishing how many people who hate football watch football. That's not sarcasm, I'm really amazed by it.
Or maybe people love to watch the actual football instead of the fluff and nonsense that networks spit out 24 hours a day.
What do you want them to show in May? Just reruns of old games? That wouldn't necessarily be bad, but it would just bore a different set of the audience instead.
Yes, I do want them to show old games. Thats what they used to do. I want to learn about NFL history. My favorite team and players as well as others. What set of audience is that going to bore? The set that loves watching draft prospects on the red carpet, Thursday Night Football, Carrie Underwoods legs, and fantasy football stats? Eff that audience set. They are the reason the league is headed down the toilet anyway.
They do show old games, as part of a whole variety of programming. That's my point. You still do get the part you want, and you can ignore the stuff that you don't like.
Fuck off.
Quote:
In comment 13957631 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 13957609 christian said:
Quote:
It's astonishing how many people who hate football watch football. That's not sarcasm, I'm really amazed by it.
Or maybe people love to watch the actual football instead of the fluff and nonsense that networks spit out 24 hours a day.
What do you want them to show in May? Just reruns of old games? That wouldn't necessarily be bad, but it would just bore a different set of the audience instead.
Yes, I do want them to show old games. Thats what they used to do. I want to learn about NFL history. My favorite team and players as well as others.
It's almost as if books and the internet didn't exist.
The reason why I somewhat discount they player's opinion is because they're usually playing in a game on Sunday at the same time as everyone else - not sure how much time they actually spend watching other players/teams play.
I would say that they may be in a special position to remark on players in their own division that they watch game film, but hard to know how much bias they have AGAINST players on rival teams. I could imagine a player on the Eagles might rank a player on the Cowboys lower than what he should just out of spite.
Those 2 reasons are why i think the list lacks credibility.
I don't dismiss players opinions, but it doesn't seem like the list is put together in a rigorous manner. Which is fine if you don't get hung up on what number appears next to your favorite player.
And, adding to that, IIRC, it's a collection of top-10 or top-20 lists that NFLN expands out to top-100 based on the results. In other words, if a player is unanimously the 21st best player in the league (and therefore not present on any ballots), he will not appear on the top 100, but if one player randomly appears in a handful of top-10 lists but is absent from the vast majority of ballots, he will likely make the list.
It's not intended to be scientific, obviously.