Jump to content

CNNSI Ranks the best backfields in the NFL...


Recommended Posts

absolultey horrible. we should at least be top 15

 

We were ranked 14th in rushing yards and our QB was 23rd in passing yards so anything above 15 is too high IMO. 27th is too low however, I'm thinking more 18-22 range. We tend to over-value our beloved team. I do think we have the potential for a top 5 backfield with better blocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think a lot of people here realize how terrible our offense has been over the past few years.....

 

That article is a dose of reality. When I saw the headline, I was surprised, but when you think about it, how high up the list can you move them? Trent Edwards is unproven. I love Marshawn's effort and heart, but he will be on the sidelines for three games and we will be dealing with a completely revamped O-line.

 

On the other hand, has John Mullin ever heard of Fred Jackson? How do you not mention Jackson in Buffalo's backfield?

 

Teams ranked too high:

Falcons at 7

Packers at 8

Dolphins at 12

Jets at 25

 

Teams ranked too low:

Colts at 10

Vikings at 16

Saints at 17

Titans at 18

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

At first I though they were just ranking RB sets, and thought "27 is WAY too low, the Bills should be top-10 at worst." But when you include QBs...the Bills definitely aren't top-10, but neither are they 27th either. Maybe in the 15-20 range.

 

But there's no way in hell backfields like the Niners, Bucs, or Broncos ("Kyle Orton and a 'committee'?) are better than the Bills' backfield. And the writer puts the Bills backfield 27th because of...Owens? :blink: What? Did I miss a memo? Is he a RB now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a stupid premise for an article. Who's the best "backfield"? How can you lump QB's and RB's together, and what purpose does it serve?

 

 

All of these rankings are stupid but it's fun to play along sometimes and watch everyone get their panties in a bunch over what others think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well New England comes in at #4 because of:

 

Tom Brady - hasn't played since week 1 of 2008

Lawrence Maroney- hasn't played since week 2 of 2008

Fred Taylor- 33 years old and coming off his worst statistical season since he missed all of 2001.

 

So just which reality did you guys EXPECT this list to be generated from!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first I though they were just ranking RB sets, and thought "27 is WAY too low, the Bills should be top-10 at worst." But when you include QBs...the Bills definitely aren't top-10, but neither are they 27th either. Maybe in the 15-20 range.

 

But there's no way in hell backfields like the Niners, Bucs, or Broncos ("Kyle Orton and a 'committee'?) are better than the Bills' backfield. And the writer puts the Bills backfield 27th because of...Owens? :blink:What? Did I miss a memo? Is he a RB now?

 

I guess they are presuming thay Owens prescence makes Edwards that much better...I hope so....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first I though they were just ranking RB sets, and thought "27 is WAY too low, the Bills should be top-10 at worst." But when you include QBs...the Bills definitely aren't top-10, but neither are they 27th either. Maybe in the 15-20 range.

 

But there's no way in hell backfields like the Niners, Bucs, or Broncos ("Kyle Orton and a 'committee'?) are better than the Bills' backfield. And the writer puts the Bills backfield 27th because of...Owens? :blink: What? Did I miss a memo? Is he a RB now?

 

 

My personal favorite was Shaun Hill and Frank Gore for the niners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were ranked 14th in rushing yards and our QB was 23rd in passing yards so anything above 15 is too high IMO. 27th is too low however, I'm thinking more 18-22 range. We tend to over-value our beloved team. I do think we have the potential for a top 5 backfield with better blocking.

 

As nearly all others automatically undervalue the Bills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest issue with this is that his only justification for this seems to be the addition of TO. He's saying that we're 27 (in a negative way) because of TO. Which is ridiculous.

 

But I'm not taking too much offense after seeing where he ranked some other groups. Peyton Manning and co. and #10, one spot behind… The Bears? IMO Jay Cutler + nobody is not greater than Peyton + Joseph Addai + Donald Brown. Aaron Schaub and Steve Slaton @ 15? And how are Kyle Orton and Knowshon Moreno ahead of anyone other than maybe Detroit or Oakland?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well New England comes in at #4 because of:

 

Tom Brady - hasn't played since week 1 of 2008

Lawrence Maroney- hasn't played since week 2 of 2008

Fred Taylor- 33 years old and coming off his worst statistical season since he missed all of 2001.

 

So just which reality did you guys EXPECT this list to be generated from!?

 

Agreed on Maroney and Taylor, but c'mon...Brady is still arguably the best QB in football and he's still in the prime of his career. Until he actually shows rust, I think you have to pencil him in as a force to be reckoned with.

 

Now I'll say eleven hail mary's for complimenting the Pats*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...