NFL's top 50 players

[Liquid Swords]

I'm sorry but i don't agree with much of this list at all. Chad Johnson at 7? He's great, but no. And Frank Gore shouldn't be that high either.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Q will get his respect when he is the Super Bowl MVP.

A player like him has to be on the big stage for his talent to be truly understood.

 

[cardsfanmd]

AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!! NOOOOO!


Not another - Whose is better ? Boldin or Fitz. Thread.

After about 6 million of these threads the conclusion is you are comparing apples to oranges.

Fitz - is more of your prototypical receiver

Boldin - more of a hybrid player that, put in various positions and situations.

It is a debate that has been going on for years, and I would hate to lose a debate about the top 50 players for another Boldin vs Fitz thread.

Well said Rugby.

 

[ajcardfan]

Fitzgerald and Boldin should BOTH, easily, be in the top 50. It's ridiculous that Cards fans would argue like it was Fitzgerald's fault for Boldin not making it.

 

[kerouac9]

Fitzgerald and Boldin should BOTH, easily, be in the top 50. It's ridiculous that Cards fans would argue like it was Fitzgerald's fault for Boldin not making it.

I don't know. There are 22 positions on a football field. If you took 2 from each of them, you'd only have space for 6 more players. The fact that 1 team in the 32-team NFL would have 3 of the Top 50 players is statistically unlikely. The fact that a team with 3 of the Top 50 players would be 5-11 last season, and 16-32 the past three seasons, is even more unlikely.

Super Bowl teams should have at least 3 Top 50 players (Manning, Freeney, Harrison; Urlacher, Briggs, Hester). Playoff teams should have at least two. Teams that draft in the Top 10 five years in a row should feel fortunate to have one.

This is a great offseason experiment. I'm going to try and do my Top 50 players list over the next couple days...

 

[Shane]

Silly Q fanatics.

Larry is superior to 'Quan in every category except running people over.

You are insane! Yea I said it.

 

[Shane]

Like I said its even more of a travesty that Prisco doesnt even count Boldin in his top 70.

 

[ajcardfan]

I don't know. There are 22 positions on a football field. If you took 2 from each of them, you'd only have space for 6 more players. The fact that 1 team in the 32-team NFL would have 3 of the Top 50 players is statistically unlikely. The fact that a team with 3 of the Top 50 players would be 5-11 last season, and 16-32 the past three seasons, is even more unlikely.

Super Bowl teams should have at least 3 Top 50 players (Manning, Freeney, Harrison; Urlacher, Briggs, Hester). Playoff teams should have at least two. Teams that draft in the Top 10 five years in a row should feel fortunate to have one.

This is a great offseason experiment. I'm going to try and do my Top 50 players list over the next couple days...

It's pretty debatable, yes. Personally, I think Fitzgerald and Boldin are the best two players on the Cards, I'd have them ahead of Wilson. One thing about both, is they are still young. Fitzgerald is the youngest player on this list (I think) and is the youngest WR on our team. I would factor that sort of thing in. Ray Lewis, for example, is still good, but he's not near the player he was 5,6 years ago. I wouldn't put him on my list right now.

Also, to counter your line of reasoning about players per team..

Football is the ultimate "team" sport. I don't think it's strange, at all, that a 5-11 team could have as many top players as a Super Bowl team. When you talk about teams, it's talent across the board. Should Fitz, Boldin and Wilson be penalized by our subpar talent on the oline and at CB?

 

[Assface]

Like I said its even more of a travesty that Prisco doesn't even count Boldin in his top 70.

I can see leaving him out of the top 50 (I'd have him in there, though) but not even top 70... He should have at least been mentioned somewhere.

 

[Assface]

Andre Johnson is actually better than Boldin. I can't really argue with that one, but Lee Evans over Boldin is debatable because while both are great young receivers, Boldin = Pro Bowler. Evans = not yet.

If you look at the stats then Andre Johnson's best year would be Boldin's 4th best. The only season of Anquan's where he didn't have better numbers than Johnson's best year was when he was injured. Lee Evans has only had one big year but he has averaged 8 touchdowns in his 3 years.

 

[dogpoo32]

Q is the only man on earth that could father my children without me being the slightest bit angry. I would hope my wife wouldn't have a problem with it either. He is number one to me. travesty.

 

[kerouac9]

It's pretty debatable, yes. Personally, I think Fitzgerald and Boldin are the best two players on the Cards, I'd have them ahead of Wilson. One thing about both, is they are still young. Fitzgerald is the youngest player on this list (I think) and is the youngest WR on our team. I would factor that sort of thing in. Ray Lewis, for example, is still good, but he's not near the player he was 5,6 years ago. I wouldn't put him on my list right now.

Also, to counter your line of reasoning about players per team..

Football is the ultimate "team" sport. I don't think it's strange, at all, that a 5-11 team could have as many top players as a Super Bowl team. When you talk about teams, it's talent across the board. Should Fitz, Boldin and Wilson be penalized by our subpar talent on the oline and at CB?

For what it's worth, I'm debating whether to put Lewis or a guy like Derrick Brooks on my Top 50 list. Doesn't it seem hypocritical of you to put Anquan on your list based mainly on his intangibles, and then dock Ray Lewis because he's probably just as athletically talented now as Anquan is, but is as good (if not better) in all the intangibles? Ray Lewis is a leader and a student of the game and no one wants to win more than him, but he's also at a greater impact position than Anquan. Ray-ray is not the player he was 5 or 6 years ago, but the player he was then was a force of nature and maybe one of the Top 20 players in NFL history.

As for the final point, I guess I agree and disagree. I mean, it's easy to say that three guys from your favorite squad deserve to be on a Top 50 list, but I'm guessing that when I start to put it together, there are a ton of guys that I'm going to have to leave off that I really, really like. I would just think that if you had 3 of the Top 50 players in the NFL on your squad, you wouldn't be a perennial disappointment to your fans, city, the media, and the league.

 

[kerouac9]

It's actually pretty fun to put this list together. My first run through, I had 54 players in my Top 50, and Anquan Boldin and Larry Fitzgerald didn't even get a sniff of the list. There are a lot of good players in the NFL; this isn't a knock on them. Chad Johnson isn't on my Top 50 players list.

 

[Assface]

It's actually pretty fun to put this list together. My first run through, I had 54 players in my Top 50, and Anquan Boldin and Larry Fitzgerald didn't even get a sniff of the list. There are a lot of good players in the NFL; this isn't a knock on them. Chad Johnson isn't on my Top 50 players list.

32 teams, 22 non special teams starters....that's 704 starters. That's a lot of names to choose from.

 

[Ryanwb]

I'm convinced that Chad Johnson is the most overrated player in the NFL

 

[kerouac9]

32 teams, 22 non special teams starters....that's 704 starters. That's a lot of names to choose from.

Right now, there are 43 names on my "honorable mention" list for the Top 50 players in the NFL. I'm becoming convinced that those people that crow about the talent that the Arizona Cardinals have assembled the past few years just don't watch a lot of other NFL teams.

But I do have 3 Cards in my Top 100 (or so). I'm not sure I have any Browns or 49ers. I don't think I have any Buffalo Bills or Detroit Lions or Packers.

 

[Duckjake]

Silly Q fanatics.

Larry is superior to 'Quan in every category except running people over.

I had forgotten until this morning that we've never had Larry and Q healthy for all 16 games in one season. It will be interesting to see what they can do if they both can play without injury for an entire season.

 

[ajcardfan]

For what it's worth, I'm debating whether to put Lewis or a guy like Derrick Brooks on my Top 50 list. Doesn't it seem hypocritical of you to put Anquan on your list based mainly on his intangibles, and then dock Ray Lewis because he's probably just as athletically talented now as Anquan is, but is as good (if not better) in all the intangibles? Ray Lewis is a leader and a student of the game and no one wants to win more than him, but he's also at a greater impact position than Anquan. Ray-ray is not the player he was 5 or 6 years ago, but the player he was then was a force of nature and maybe one of the Top 20 players in NFL history.

As for the final point, I guess I agree and disagree. I mean, it's easy to say that three guys from your favorite squad deserve to be on a Top 50 list, but I'm guessing that when I start to put it together, there are a ton of guys that I'm going to have to leave off that I really, really like. I would just think that if you had 3 of the Top 50 players in the NFL on your squad, you wouldn't be a perennial disappointment to your fans, city, the media, and the league.

I, personally, wouldn't be putting Boldin on the list due to his intangibles. His stats are not too shabby either. You can accuse me of being a "homer". That's fine. However, I do watch a lot of football besides the Cardinals games. Boldin and Fitz would be 1 and 2 on most teams, an no worse than a 3 on any team. IMO, of course.

It's not the fault of Boldin and Fitz that the Cards have been perennial disappointments. I blame that on the curse!

 

[Duckjake]

Boldin has finished 7th,5th and 3rd in receiving yards in the three seasons he started more than 10 games. Finishing 5th in 2005 despite missing two games.

Puts him in some rather elite company.

 

[kerouac9]

I, personally, wouldn't be putting Boldin on the list due to his intangibles. His stats are not too shabby either. You can accuse me of being a "homer". That's fine. However, I do watch a lot of football besides the Cardinals games. Boldin and Fitz would be 1 and 2 on most teams, an no worse than a 3 on any team. IMO, of course.

It's not the fault of Boldin and Fitz that the Cards have been perennial disappointments. I blame that on the curse!

His stats are not too shabby, but he gets a lot of chances to put them up because the Cards haven't been able to run during his tenure here, and so they pass a lot. I won't argue that Boldin and Fitz would start for any team in the NFL, but my Top 50 list only features 5 WRs. I've said it before: WR is the most replacable position in the NFL, and the main feature of that is that more marquee WRs change teams each offseason than any other position.

I'm not saying that you're a homer--I've read to many of your posts to accuse you of that. But put together a little Top 50 list of your own, and see if you can find a way to squeeze them in. It's really hard.

 

[ajcardfan]

His stats are not too shabby, but he gets a lot of chances to put them up because the Cards haven't been able to run during his tenure here, and so they pass a lot. I won't argue that Boldin and Fitz would start for any team in the NFL, but my Top 50 list only features 5 WRs. I've said it before: WR is the most replacable position in the NFL, and the main feature of that is that more marquee WRs change teams each offseason than any other position.

I'm not saying that you're a homer--I've read to many of your posts to accuse you of that. But put together a little Top 50 list of your own, and see if you can find a way to squeeze them in. It's really hard.

All right, I will. It'll probably take a couple of days, or so.

 

[CardinalChris]

People often rank players on their draft position. First rounders get more slack than other player when rated if they are drafted high IMO.

 

[Stout]

His stats are not too shabby, but he gets a lot of chances to put them up because the Cards haven't been able to run during his tenure here, and so they pass a lot. I won't argue that Boldin and Fitz would start for any team in the NFL, but my Top 50 list only features 5 WRs. I've said it before: WR is the most replacable position in the NFL, and the main feature of that is that more marquee WRs change teams each offseason than any other position.

I'm not saying that you're a homer--I've read to many of your posts to accuse you of that. But put together a little Top 50 list of your own, and see if you can find a way to squeeze them in. It's really hard.

You only have FIVE receivers out of the top FIFTY players currently in the NFL? Sorry, Kerouac, but that's just crazy.

 

[Duckjake]

I've said it before: WR is the most replacable position in the NFL, and the main feature of that is that more marquee WRs change teams each offseason than any other position.

Maybe more than other positions... but of the top 11 WRs in receiving yards for 2006 only Terrel Owens was not with his original team.

But I agree with you on replacing guys. Defenses can't shut down WRs as easily as they can RBs and NFL teams are going to complete some passes even if Rex Grossman is the QB. It's why I say the low numbers you usually see from rookie WRs often come not from being rookies but from not yet being a featured receiver for their team.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

For the right players, I think the Cardinals should trade Bolden, fan favorite or not he doesn't really make a huge difference on the field in terms of wins and losses.

Bolden might not bring as much in return as Fitz

Sometimes I get the feeling Cards fans have Sammy Sosa disease with Bolden, they go home happy if Bolden hits a homer.