Top 100 players running thread

[Patler]

You keep bringing up what he's done. That really doesn't do justice to what he is.

What do you think he is as a football player? If you put all your stock into what he did as a 21, 22 year old and injured 23 year old, I have a feeling you could be surprised when it plays out.

Finley might serve you some crow going forward. You could be right though, maybe he is just what is numbers show to this point, unless you weren't suggesting that either. In that case, what exactly did the 82 catches in 3 seasons even mean?

Unbelievable.

My comment had absolutely nothing to do with what he might do in the future. If he stays healthy he is likely to be an all-pro, one of the very best in the league. I completely expect that to happen, if he stays healthy. I have said that over, and over again in different threads. BUT, when a ranking comes out of the top 100 players in the league, it generally requires something to have put that player in the forefront of the minds of those generating the list. Everyone sees Finley's potential, but his actual accomplishments aren't that significant, and after having missed most of the last season, those doing the rankings will look more to guys who had big seasons in 2010, or who had huge seasons in years past. Finley has had neither.

If you have read anything that I have written to mean that I don't think Finley can be one of the best in the league, you need to brush up on your comprehension skills.

[Guiness]

Whenever I see D'Bricksaw's name, I can't help but this about how snake bitten the Oakland franchise is.

They take the highest rated OL with Robert Gallery in 2004.

Jordan Gross in 2003. Jets get D'Bricksaw as the top T in 2005. Browns get Joe Thomas in 2006, and he'll undoubtedly be higher on this list.

They get a serviceable left guard in Gallery. I'm pretty sure his name won't be on this list!

[pbmax]

Dallas Clark in the 70s? Really? I know on average you less than three per position, but that seems low unless greater weight is placed on last year.

[bobblehead]

Unbelievable.

My comment had absolutely nothing to do with what he might do in the future. If he stays healthy he is likely to be an all-pro, one of the very best in the league. I completely expect that to happen, if he stays healthy. I have said that over, and over again in different threads. BUT, when a ranking comes out of the top 100 players in the league, it generally requires something to have put that player in the forefront of the minds of those generating the list. Everyone sees Finley's potential, but his actual accomplishments aren't that significant, and after having missed most of the last season, those doing the rankings will look more to guys who had big seasons in 2010, or who had huge seasons in years past. Finley has had neither.

If you have read anything that I have written to mean that I don't think Finley can be one of the best in the league, you need to brush up on your comprehension skills.

Patler, I agree and disagree with you at the same time. We aren't talking about a guy who played dominant in college and has potential. We are talking about a guy that takes over NFL games....playoff game no less. A guy who has shown at this level to be a complete game changer. Its not just potential anymore. If there was a complete redraft of the entire NFL I would put good money on Finley going top 100. Thats not quite a fair comparison, because youth would factor in, but to simply look at 82 catches in 3 seasons and say he has accomplished very little isn't quite representative of what he HAS accomplished.

Now the flip side would be defining this as the most productive players in the game....Finley belongs nowhere on that list. I think you are arguing one, while others are arguing the other.

[bobblehead]

#80 Jared Allen
#79 D'Brickashaw Ferguson
#78 Dallas Clark
#77 Chris Snee
#76 Santonio Holmes
#75 Jay Ratliff
#74 Greg Jennings
#73 Trent Cole
#72 Tony Romo
#71 Mario Williams

Really?? Tony Romo? I understand a QB premium, but here is another guy who would not be on my list (or might squeek in at 100)

[Patler]

Patler, I agree and disagree with you at the same time. We aren't talking about a guy who played dominant in college and has potential. We are talking about a guy that takes over NFL games....playoff game no less. A guy who has shown at this level to be a complete game changer. Its not just potential anymore. If there was a complete redraft of the entire NFL I would put good money on Finley going top 100. Thats not quite a fair comparison, because youth would factor in, but to simply look at 82 catches in 3 seasons and say he has accomplished very little isn't quite representative of what he HAS accomplished.

Now the flip side would be defining this as the most productive players in the game....Finley belongs nowhere on that list. I think you are arguing one, while others are arguing the other.

What I am really saying is this, when someone sits down to write the list of their "top 100 players" they have the daunting task of ranking players from all teams at all different positions into one single list. On average, 4-5 players/position; but we all know that QBs and some other "glamor" positions will have more than that, at the expense of perhaps FBs, guards and TEs.

While Finley has abundant potential, he has not had the accomplishments to rise to the level of notoriety around the league that some other TEs have had. Since only a small number of TEs will make it, I doubt Finley will have had much consideration, because accomplishments will matter. Finley is simply not a houshold name recognized by fans, players and writers around the league just yet. When they think of TEs, the think of those with gaudy numbers, the high draft picks that are talked about all the time, etc.

If he had been a first round pick, or had a huge year, or even back to back years of better than average performance he would be more of a household name. But he wasn't and hasn't.

Think of him as a well-kept secret who has not yet gained the notoriety necessary to make this type of list. If you asked all the NFL writers to list the top 2 or 3 TEs that should make the list, I doubt very many of them would think of Finley at this point. Not enough highlights on him out there yet.

Note that I did say his chances were better if this was a predictive list of the future rather than a list of current status as players.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm not really arguing here. You could make a case for him being or not being on this list. However, I think he has more notoriety than you think. People talked him up, ad nauseum, going into last year. Especially us fantasy geeks. He was a top 3 fantasy TE going into last year. Then, he kicked ass to the tune of two 100 yard games in his first 4 games last year, and the bangwagon has full. People thought of him as perhaps the best pass receiving TE in the game. That was coming off a strong end to the 2009 season and blowing up in the playoff game vs. Arizona. Now, he was injured, so perhaps some downgraded him for that. But you could say the same for some others that will likely appear on this list. I think the question for me is that going into the 2011 season would I take him as a top 100 player. I think I would. Injury risk aside. He's that talented. I'd probably have him near the bottom of the list for now (I'd take him over Santanio Holmes and a couple of others already revealed, but not a lot of the other players). I could see somebody arguing against it because of his injuries though.

[Patler]

Really?? Tony Romo? I understand a QB premium, but here is another guy who would not be on my list (or might squeek in at 100)

Yet to come, Brady, Manning, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Rivers for sure, I would think; Vick and several others possible. Starting to look like it will be almost embarrassing to be a starting QB who doesn't make it.

[Lurker64]

Really?? Tony Romo? I understand a QB premium, but here is another guy who would not be on my list (or might squeek in at 100)

The quarterbacks situation is really very strange on the list. There are 12 on the list.

The bottom four is constituted by McNabb, Flacco, Freeman, and Romo.

Obvious inclusions near the top include: Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, and Roethliberger.

That means that two of the following QBs will not make the list at all: Michael Vick, Eli Manning, Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub. I would easily put all of those guys ahead of McNabb.

Potentially rage inducing for Packer Fans, there are 14 WRs ahead of Greg Jennings on the list. That's unconscionable.

[swede]

I'd like to see any one of the other 14 dudes put the team on his back and score a game-winning touchdown with a broken leg.

Grrreeeeg Jennnings!

[Patler]

The quarterbacks situation is really very strange on the list. There are 12 on the list.

The bottom four is constituted by McNabb, Flacco, Freeman, and Romo.

Obvious inclusions near the top include: Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, and Roethliberger.

That means that two of the following QBs will not make the list at all: Michael Vick, Eli Manning, Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub. I would easily put all of those guys ahead of McNabb.

Potentially rage inducing for Packer Fans, there are 14 WRs ahead of Greg Jennings on the list. That's unconscionable.

So we already know there are 12 QBs? Shows how much attention I am paying!
More than 1/4 of the list is made up of QBs and WRs?

[RashanGary]

Think of him as a well-kept secret who has not yet gained the notoriety necessary to make this type of list. If you asked all the NFL writers to list the top 2 or 3 TEs that should make the list, I doubt very many of them would think of Finley at this point. Not enough highlights on him out there yet.

Note that I did say his chances were better if this was a predictive list of the future rather than a list of current status as players.

Agreed. It seemed like your 82 catches in 3 seasons thing was evidence for why Finley wasn't a top 100 player. Your original post could have gone either way. That's why I asked while also suggesting if you did think that way, you could easily be very wrong. When you post things and give no indication of what you think, it could lead people to believe what your facts and citations of what others might think suggest. You never really had a thesis there, just a couple facts and no closer. Your new post was very direct and easy to understand where you were coming from.

I doubt he received much (or any) consideration at all. In my opinion, 82 receptions in three seasons, with a most recent season of 5 games played aren't likely to get him much consideration from anyone other than Packer fans for this type of list.

[pbmax]

Really?? Tony Romo? I understand a QB premium, but here is another guy who would not be on my list (or might squeek in at 100)

Brady, Brees, Manning, Rivers, Rothliesberger, Rivers, Rodgers, Romo, Flacco and Freeman.

10 QBs? You have got to be kidding.

Not you, Bobble, but the people who voted.


EDIT: Forgot McNabb. So that's minimum eleven QBs.

[Lurker64]

So we already know there are 12 QBs? Shows how much attention I am paying!
More than 1/4 of the list is made up of QBs and WRs?

If you watch the show, intermittently they give statistical details like "there are 7 Packers on the list, there are 6 Cowboys on the list, there are four Steelers on the list, there are 2 Vikings on the list, there are no Seahawks on the list, there are 12 QBs on the list, there are 4 TEs on the list, there are four DTs on the list, of the nine active Superbowl MVPs only six are on the list, etc."

[get louder at lambeau]

Brady, Brees, Manning, Rivers, Rothliesberger, Rivers, Rodgers, Romo, Flacco and Freeman.

10 QBs? You have got to be kidding.

Not you, Bobble, but the people who voted.


EDIT: Forgot McNabb. So that's minimum eleven QBs.

You counted Rivers twice.