[CBFF] Ranking the quarterbacks, team by team

[Dwayne]

Is there anyone out there who actually analizes teams depth/players? If
there is point them to me, and I would gladly start reading them.

If it were not for the running game, I can not imagine what Ortons numbers
would have looked like. Orton looked a lot like Krenzil minus the turnovers.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matt Langschwager" <matthewindc at yahoo.com>
To: <post at chicagobearsfanforum.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [CBFF] Ranking the quarterbacks, team by team


> I agree.  Let's break down those seven teams "above" us. All info from
NFL.com:
>
>   20.  Tampa -  Chris Simms (s), Luke McCown, Tim Rattay
>   21.  Dallas -  Old Man Bledsoe (s), Tony Romo, Drew Henson
>   22.  San Diego - Philip Rivers (s), A.J. Feeley
>   23.  Houston - David Carr (s), Sage Rosenfels, Dave Ragone
>   24.  Detroit - Jon Kitna (s?), Josh McCown, Dan Orlovsky
>   25.  Cleveland - Charlie Frye (s), Trent Dilfer, Derek Anderson
>   26.  NY Jets - Chad Pennington (s?), Pat Ramsey, Brooks Bollinger
>   27.  DA Bears - Rex Grossman, Brian Griese, Kyle Orton
>
>   Wow.  I mean, WOW.  With the possible exception of Pennington if he were
healthy, is there ANYONE above the Bears there that you would consider
better than Brian Griese, LET ALONE Rex Grossman?!?  Simms has started 13
games to Rex's 8 (but less than Kyle's 15).  THAT certainly makes him seven
places better!  Bledsoe hasn't been relevent since he left the Pats five
years ago.  Rivers' placement can ONLY be based on potential, since that's
all he has; yet Rex's potential doesn't factor in?  I know the cast around
Carr has sucked, but if Carr was a true gamebreaker, don't you think we
would have seen something over the past four years?  Pennington is a proven
commodity, but he's even MORE injury-prone than Rex.  I won't even dignify
anyone else by typing their names out again...
>
>   Footballoutsiders was not just "saying the (Bears) unit seriously
sucks."  This was a slap to the face hard enough to knock us and the Bears
to the ground, at which point we were held down by Sean Salisbury and Colin
Coward (gee, did I spell that right?) as Footballoutsiders urinated on us,
cut off our ear, dowsed us in gasoline, and then lit us on fire.
>
>   Without context, #27 of 32 sounds about right based on last year's
outings.  But WITH context, in line with the other teams, how can anyone say
Cleveland is in better shape QB-wise than Chicago?  The Bears have to be
better than 27 because I see seven teams in worse situations right there!
And that doesn't even include the five teams apparently even worse than the
Bears.
>
>   Speaking of idiotic rankings, yesterday at the gym I was watching NFL
Live.  During the show the scrolling ticker repeatedly showed some sort of
"Ultimate Depth" rankings per position, which is something I guess the
football gurus are doing to kill time right now.  The Bears were top ten in
defense categories, and bottom ten in QB and WR.  No surprise there.  But in
RB, they weren't in the top ten!  I regarded this fact with suspicion.
11-20 eventually came up.  The Bears were 18, but even more infuriating,
Minny was 17.  I almost fell off the treadmill in my rage, then recouped and
laughed out loud, because once again these "experts" don't know what they're
doing and thus all information given is tainted and useless.  How anyone
could ever think Minnesota is in better shape now with running backs than
Chicago is beyond me.  I then ignored the ticker and halfway listened to the
studio heads talk about whether or not Reggie Bush might hold out.  This
gave me a pleasant
>  feeling, knowing the Bears picks are all signed and ready to go to ONU.
>
>   Yes, this response was long, but I got really angry as I typed out those
QB lists above, and needed to vent.
>
>   Matt
>
> Jim Ferolie <ferolie at charter.net> wrote:
>   I understand not going apesh*t over the Bears' QBs, but 27 is saying the
> unit seriously sucks. Orton by himself was probably worth a 27 ranking.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Victor Waldron"
>
>
> > The ranking is ok considering what we do know (not much). But looking
> > at the teams immediately above us, if you believe in Rex then we
> > should be ranked much higher:
> >
> > 20. TB
> > 21. Dal
> > 22. SD
> > 23. Hou
> > 24. Det
> > 25. Cle
> > 26. NYJ
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Check out the CBFF Blog:
> blog.chicagobearsfanforum.com
> CBFF Homepage:
> www.chicagobearsfanforum.com
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low  PC-to-Phone call
rates.
> _______________________________________________
> Check out the CBFF Blog:
> blog.chicagobearsfanforum.com
> CBFF Homepage:
> www.chicagobearsfanforum.com
>