PDA

View Full Version : Top 10 most indespensable players


Acreboy
07-05-2007, 10:06 PM
I disagree with #7 the most. They'd be better without him. Also disagree with #5, they could still win 10 games without him.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeff&id=2926319&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

Shiver
07-05-2007, 10:09 PM
I disagree with #7 the most. They'd be better without him. Also disagree with #5, they could still win 10 games without him.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeff&id=2926319&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

They'd be better off with Joey Harrington starting..


:rolleyes:

Acreboy
07-05-2007, 10:10 PM
They'd be better off with Joey Harrington starting..


:rolleyes:
At least they'd have a QB playing the QB position.

San Diego Chicken
07-05-2007, 10:15 PM
The Falcons look like one of those boom or bust teams right now. I guess the other mediocre teams in their division make them look better than they really are, but if they fall to 5-11 or something like that, it likely wouldn't matter who is playing QB at that point. The team in general doesn't look very good and that includes Vick.

Moses
07-05-2007, 10:20 PM
This thread just seems like an excuse to take shots at Vick.

Acreboy
07-05-2007, 10:24 PM
This thread just seems like an excuse to take shots at Vick.

Nope, not having Peyton #1 is just wrong.

And LT not on the list at all is just plain bad.

Moses
07-05-2007, 10:26 PM
Nope, not having Peyton #1 is just wrong.

And LT not on the list at all is just plain bad.

Saying the Falcons would be a better team without Vick is just plain stupid.

Acreboy
07-05-2007, 10:29 PM
Saying the Falcons would be a better team without Vick is just plain stupid.OK, care to add anything to the thread or you going to just bring that up. I am entitled to my own opinion.

d34ng3l021
07-05-2007, 10:33 PM
OK, care to add anything to the thread or you going to just bring that up. I am entitled to my own opinion.

Your opinion is wrong.

Moses
07-05-2007, 10:36 PM
OK, care to add anything to the thread or you going to just bring that up. I am entitled to my own opinion.

Just explain to me how the Falcons would be a better team without Michael Vick.

russie
07-05-2007, 10:38 PM
This thread just seems like an excuse to take shots at Vick.

no, michael vick is a good reason to take shots at vick


he is a great athlete, but a horrible qb. i think i would rather have joey harrington at qb than vick

russie
07-05-2007, 10:39 PM
Just explain to me how the Falcons would be a better team without Michael Vick.

cause he suc ks at qb?

MasterShake
07-05-2007, 10:40 PM
Frank Gore certainly deserves consideration on this list.

Acreboy
07-05-2007, 10:40 PM
Vick is an athlete playing QB. He isn't a QB playing QB. He needs to make plays with his legs because he can't make them with his arm. if the passes were more accurate then his WR's might be able to catch.

Brees threw for over 4k yards to a bunch of unknowns.

BlindSite
07-05-2007, 10:44 PM
I don't get how our defense is starting to decline when our oldest players are mike minter and mike rucker, we've got two replacements for Rucker, one of the youngest LB corps in the NFL and a young trio of excellent cornerbacks.

Our defense is just beginning to hit its stride.

draftguru151
07-05-2007, 10:45 PM
It's still ridiculous to say that Joey Harrington would make the Falcons better than Michael Vick.

zoinks
07-05-2007, 10:50 PM
In the six years since Vick has come into the league, what's their W/L record when he's been sidelined?


Not trying to sound like a homer, but I'm a bit surprised Vince Young isn't on this list.

P-L
07-05-2007, 10:54 PM
Nope, not having Peyton #1 is just wrong.

And LT not on the list at all is just plain bad.

Peyton may be the best QB in football, but I don't think he's necessarily the most valuable. With all of the weapons the Colts have on that offense I think Jim Sorgi would fare better than Michael Bennett or Matt Cassell would on their respective teams. I think it's fine that LJ is #1 on that list. The Chiefs have very little in terms of a passing game. Even if Dwayne Bowe develops quickly, you still have a very unexperienced QB in Brodie Croyle and no other reliable receivers. Michael Bennett isn't anything close to a starting caliber back. And he's proven that. If the Chiefs lose LJ, say hello to a top 3-5 pick in the draft. I think if the Pats lost Brady or the Colts lost Manning they could still compete for their respective divisions.

draftguru151
07-05-2007, 10:56 PM
The fact that Manning is even on the list is ridiculous. Sorgi is the greatest QB to ever touch a football, the Colts just use Manning so some games are fair. You wanna talk about a team that would be better without their starting QB, it's the Colts, not the Falcons.

GB12
07-05-2007, 10:57 PM
They have a poll for most indispensible for each team, though the results are as if people just chose the most recognizable name on the list.
http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/polling?event_id=3012&action=1&question22442=90870&question22443=90872&question22444=90878&question22445=90885&question22446=90889&question22447=90895&question22448=90899&question22449=90903&question22450=90906&question22451=90911&question22452=90917&question22453=90923&question22454=90928&question22455=90932&question22456=90936&question22457=90943

CC.SD
07-05-2007, 11:00 PM
I get the Michael Turner philosophy, but seriously. Who is Chudiha fooling?

Gates is big, and one of the key cogs of our passing attack, but he's not LT.

Dam8610
07-05-2007, 11:02 PM
Manning #3? Seriously? And behind the guy who got famous by riding his defense? I don't value this writer's opinion at all.

HoopsDemon12
07-05-2007, 11:05 PM
Nope, not having Peyton #1 is just wrong.

And LT not on the list at all is just plain bad.

i disagree actually... without him that offense would have been absolutly attrocious

Acreboy
07-05-2007, 11:07 PM
i disagree actually... without him that offense would have been absolutly attrocious
I don't get what you're saying.

BamaFalcon59
07-05-2007, 11:08 PM
The Falcons look like one of those boom or bust teams right now. I guess the other mediocre teams in their division make them look better than they really are, but if they fall to 5-11 or something like that, it likely wouldn't matter who is playing QB at that point. The team in general doesn't look very good and that includes Vick.

The NFC South is not mediocre. The Saints look to be Super Bowl contenders, the Panthers were a Super Bowl favorite and have a ton of potential, the Falcons are boom or bust, and the Bucs are going from old to young fast.

And saying the Falcons would be better off without Vick is ignorant.

JK17
07-05-2007, 11:23 PM
Gates have to disagree with, he's not the most indispensible player on the Chargers. To be honest, it could be Jamal Williams, without him there is no centerpiece to that defense, which really opens things up for other teams....however I don't think you can really say any player is "indispensible" when their teams are as talented as teams like the Chargers, Patriots, Colts etc. Those teams, which all have players in the top five, are all talented enough to make up for each other...

Real indispensible palyers are the ones like LJ, who have become the entire identity of a team's offense or defense.

And as for Harrington being a better QB/better off for the Falcons...thats ridiculous, and if you truly believe they are talk to Lions or Dolphins fans about him. Not trying to knock Harrington or Vick, but Harrington isn't exactly miles ahead, if ahead at all, on Vick, as a QB, let alone a player. If you don't like Vick thats fine, but saying Harrington is a better option is a little ridiculous.

LitoSheppard
07-05-2007, 11:25 PM
Nope, not having Peyton #1 is just wrong.

And LT not on the list at all is just plain bad.

Huh? Peyton has 2 great receivers and a amazing O Line with a good defense and great coaches

Acreboy
07-05-2007, 11:28 PM
Huh? Peyton has 2 great receivers and a amazing O Line with a good defense and great coaches"Amazing" is stretching it.

Jim Sorgi couldn't do what Peyton does.

San Diego Chicken
07-05-2007, 11:30 PM
The NFC South is not mediocre. The Saints look to be Super Bowl contenders, the Panthers were a Super Bowl favorite and have a ton of potential, the Falcons are boom or bust, and the Bucs are going from old to young fast.

And saying the Falcons would be better off without Vick is ignorant.

The South went six games under .500 against non NFC South opponents. That's a pretty bad showing, and the Falcons were beaten badly both times they played the Saints. I don't think Atlanta is better without Vick, but they could be just bad enough to the point where having Vick wouldn't really make much of a difference.

LitoSheppard
07-05-2007, 11:31 PM
"Amazing" is stretching it.

Jim Sorgi couldn't do what Peyton does.

No one could do what peyton does, thats not the point, the colts would still be sucsefull without Peyton Manning

Acreboy
07-05-2007, 11:34 PM
No one could do what peyton does, thats not the point, the colts would still be sucsefull without Peyton ManningI disagree. What good are WR's if you don't have someone to throw them the ball?

JK17
07-05-2007, 11:38 PM
I disagree. What good are WR's if you don't have someone to throw them the ball?

They might not be as dynamite a team without Peyton, but even if they didn't have him, Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Addai, and a good (ranging to great) O-Line puts them in much better shape then still a lot of teams in the league, even with Ryan Leaf at QB (well, maybe not him)..

You could get rid of Peyton there, and still have a productive offense, whereas you get rid of an LJ from KC, or even as far as Vince Young from the Titans, your left with little to no offensive firepower at all.

PoopSandwich
07-05-2007, 11:40 PM
Manning
Brady
Brees
Palmer
Tomlinson
Larry Johnson
McNabb (this year because they have a rook behind him.)
Steve McNair (He's nothing special but Boller is like the 12th man on defense...)
Vince Young
Shaun Alexander

Forzy
07-05-2007, 11:49 PM
Palmer should be higher than #10.

duckseason
07-06-2007, 12:06 AM
I think this question has more to do with the backups than it does the actual player in question. And the rarer the type of player, the more indispensible they are. So I'd have a tough time putting any RB on a top 10 list. There's just too many of them. Although, I admit the Chiefs would be pretty bad without LJ. To me, the guys who are most indispensable are the beasts in the trenches. Without them, guys like LJ and Priest end up looking like every other RB who runs behind inadequate blockers. Those road graders are just a rarer breed. Guys like Lorenzo Neal and Steve Hutchinson have more of an impact when switching teams than guys like Edgerrin James or Clinton Portis do. Give me a choice between Tommie Harris and Shaun Alexander, and it's a no-brainer. I'm going with the super-rare pass rushing DT. Now, of course when you factor in money and fan support, you've got a whole different equation to consider. For me though, it's all about what makes my team better. And relying too heavily on one RB is almost always a bad idea. I don't mean it's not good to have a workhorse, I just mean you've got to have a plan B. RB is a position that it's easy to have a plan B. NT isn't. Neither is QB or LT. So in other words, if your RB is the most indispensable player on your entire team, then you need to pull your head out of your ass. There's just no excuse for that, imo.

Sniper
07-06-2007, 12:13 AM
"Amazing" is stretching it.

Jim Sorgi couldn't do what Peyton does.

This is a filthy lie. Jim Sorgi can throw a ball further than even "Gunslinger" Brett Favre and like someone said earlier, the Colts only play with Peyton because if Sorgi played, it wouldn't be fair to the other teams as Sorgi would average 550 yards and 8 TD per. Hence, the NFL doesn't want such embarassment.

I think Vick at #7 is a mistake there too. I just don't think he's that important to the team. Sorry, but even an average QB could hit 53.8% of his passes. His 1.36:1 TD/INT ratio isn't exactly scorching up the stats either. I know he's a valuable rusher, but so are Warrick Dunn and Jerious Norwood, and they're not playing QB.

JT Jag
07-06-2007, 12:38 AM
I think if you flip Peyton and Brady and Vick and Palmer, that's a good list.

The Chiefs are most definitely dead in the water without LJ. Peyton is the real MVP on that list, but the Colts aren't quite as dead in the water without him--- though they still would be dead in the water.

Brady runs that offense, but it would still be manageable considering the defense and the offensive supporting cast. If he was lost, it'd definitely be a blow.

Meanwhile, Carson Palmer's value is on a level just below these two.

Michael Vick isn't a great QB. But, let's face it. That offense just doesn't work without him. Ever since 2002, in games Vick hasn't started the team has gone 3-13.

duckseason
07-06-2007, 12:43 AM
This is a filthy lie. Jim Sorgi can throw a ball further than even "Gunslinger" Brett Favre and like someone said earlier, the Colts only play with Peyton because if Sorgi played, it wouldn't be fair to the other teams as Sorgi would average 550 yards and 8 TD per. Hence, the NFL doesn't want such embarassment.

I think Vick at #7 is a mistake there too. I just don't think he's that important to the team. Sorry, but even an average QB could hit 53.8% of his passes. His 1.36:1 TD/INT ratio isn't exactly scorching up the stats either. I know he's a valuable rusher, but so are Warrick Dunn and Jerious Norwood, and they're not playing QB.

Agreed 100% about Sorgi.

As far as Vick though, a lot of what he brings to the team can't be quantified with stats. All you have to do is hang out with a defensive coordinator during the week prior to his team facing the Falcons, and you'll see how important he is to his team. I think any guy with such rare athleticism and versatility is just inherently indispensable. Take away Vick, and you've got a completely different offense.

umphrey
07-06-2007, 01:23 AM
Larry Johnson at #1 is a joke. RBs are inherently pretty expendable and he isn't even the best in the league. Not to mention the fact that Brady and Manning are the heart and soul of perennial winning teams while LJ gets 30 carries a game so they don't have to throw.

Flyboy
07-06-2007, 01:41 AM
No Drew Brees?

...

Hahahahahaha.

Sniper
07-06-2007, 02:32 AM
Agreed 100% about Sorgi.

As far as Vick though, a lot of what he brings to the team can't be quantified with stats. All you have to do is hang out with a defensive coordinator during the week prior to his team facing the Falcons, and you'll see how important he is to his team. I think any guy with such rare athleticism and versatility is just inherently indispensable. Take away Vick, and you've got a completely different offense.

Yeah I suppose you're right. I was merely looking at it from a QB only viewpoint while forgetting everything he opens up for the other guys on his team. Plus, 1,000 yards rushing for a QB? Sickkkkkkkkkk.

And Jim Sorgi for 2008 NFL MVP! Enough with this fraud Manning, let the real stud play.

awfullyquiet
07-06-2007, 03:45 AM
the one thing that's easy to say is that denver needs champ like i need a glass of water.

a one man deflection crew. the only corner that really has the right to say he's all that.

Green Bay Scat
07-06-2007, 04:07 AM
the one thing that's easy to say is that denver needs champ like i need a glass of water.

a one man deflection crew. the only corner that really has the right to say he's all that....

....and a bag of chips

macaroni with the cheese

islandboy843
07-06-2007, 05:43 AM
Drew Brees Should be high on this list.

Who is his back up?

Sniper
07-06-2007, 06:15 AM
Drew Brees Should be high on this list.

Who is his back up?

Jamie Martin.

islandboy843
07-06-2007, 06:23 AM
Jamie Martin.


I rest my case.

bored of education
07-06-2007, 06:30 AM
I'm with him about LJ.

I think Brady is too high. He shouldn't be in the top 10. The system exploits the weaknesses of the other teams defense not highlight a QBs skills. Throw Brodie Croyle, Damon Huard, Jim Sorgi, Joey Harrington in their and they are still likely to be in playoff contention. The Pats defense and their bend not break philosophy is good enough to ride on for about 7 wins. Brady puts them in a position to wear they will win a few more games. W/o Brady they still are a .500 or above .500 team.

tylerb929
07-06-2007, 07:41 AM
I know you guys might be joking, but Jim Sorgi's stats are actually pretty good. I'd be anxious to see how he'd do in the starting role, perhaps if he were traded or something, hell he has better stats than Schaub.

In the last 3 regular season games that Sorgi has thrown a pass in (a total of 86 passes in those games, which is a fair sample considering he has only thrown 90 passes in his carreer) he has had a QB rating of 110.1, 103.8, and 94.7 (against the Broncos, Seahawks, and Cardinals). In his career he has a 5 to 1 TD ratio.

Jim Sorgi Carreer Stats (90 attempts)
99.3 QB Rating
65.6% completion rate
5 TDs, 1 INT

Not bad for someone with no experience on the field, and basicly in his rookie year.

Eaglez.Fan
07-06-2007, 08:58 AM
Nope, not having Peyton #1 is just wrong.

And LT not on the list at all is just plain bad.

You have to admit the Chiefs would be HORRIBLE without LJ. Peyton is a toss up at 1 with LJ. And LT shouldn't even be on the list. They have Michael Turner at backup, they wouldn't be as good but they'd still make the playoffs.

Sniper
07-06-2007, 09:27 AM
I'm with him about LJ.

I think Brady is too high. He shouldn't be in the top 10. The system exploits the weaknesses of the other teams defense not highlight a QBs skills. Throw Brodie Croyle, Damon Huard, Jim Sorgi, Joey Harrington in their and they are still likely to be in playoff contention. The Pats defense and their bend not break philosophy is good enough to ride on for about 7 wins. Brady puts them in a position to wear they will win a few more games. W/o Brady they still are a .500 or above .500 team.

You really think they would have been a .500 team last year w/o Brady? Come on, Jabar Gaffney and Reche Caldwell. Brady makes everyone on that offense look so much better than they are. I mean, Gaffney got cut by the Eagles pre-Stallworth trade, instead of stalwarts like Greg Lewis and all of a sudden he's looking halfway decent with the Pats?

Sniper
07-06-2007, 09:28 AM
I know you guys might be joking, but Jim Sorgi's stats are actually pretty good. I'd be anxious to see how he'd do in the starting role, perhaps if he were traded or something, hell he has better stats than Schaub.

In the last 3 regular season games that Sorgi has thrown a pass in (a total of 86 passes in those games, which is a fair sample considering he has only thrown 90 passes in his carreer) he has had a QB rating of 110.1, 103.8, and 94.7 (against the Broncos, Seahawks, and Cardinals). In his career he has a 5 to 1 TD ratio.

Jim Sorgi Carreer Stats (90 attempts)
99.3 QB Rating
65.6% completion rate
5 TDs, 1 INT

Not bad for someone with no experience on the field, and basicly in his rookie year.

Like I said, get rid of that scmuck Manning and put the real QB in the game. However, it may not be fair to the rest of the league to do something like that so keep Sorgi on the bench. We want to give the teams a chance don't we? ;)

iloxygenil
07-06-2007, 10:35 AM
I disagree with #2 and #5 the most.

The Falcons wouldn't have won 3 games last season without Vick as our QB. Schaub never won a game for us, he kept us in them, but he never won one because why? OUR TEAM is weak...

Ewing
07-06-2007, 11:23 AM
No disrespect to Antonio Gates as I think he is a great player but there is no way a tight end is more indespensable than the majority of quarterbacks in the NFL. I find it amazing the list didn't include Drew Brees. Without Drew Brees the Saints wouldn't have won five games last year.

Dam8610
07-06-2007, 11:37 AM
Hey 255979119, should I go around negative repping anyone who calls Manning a choker or a regular season QB? It's my opinion, get over it. If you want to argue it, that's fine, but giving negative rep for an opinion is pretty weak.

ShutDwn
07-06-2007, 12:24 PM
Panthers' offense would have been dead last in the NFL if Steve Smith wasn't there. He opens the offense up to do what little damage it can with it's pathetic play calling. Without him they can't get past anyone. 19 total points in the Panthers' first two games without Smith, Delhomme threw no touchdowns and a pick.

Philliez01
07-06-2007, 12:26 PM
I know you guys might be joking, but Jim Sorgi's stats are actually pretty good. I'd be anxious to see how he'd do in the starting role, perhaps if he were traded or something, hell he has better stats than Schaub.

In the last 3 regular season games that Sorgi has thrown a pass in (a total of 86 passes in those games, which is a fair sample considering he has only thrown 90 passes in his carreer) he has had a QB rating of 110.1, 103.8, and 94.7 (against the Broncos, Seahawks, and Cardinals). In his career he has a 5 to 1 TD ratio.

Jim Sorgi Carreer Stats (90 attempts)
99.3 QB Rating
65.6% completion rate
5 TDs, 1 INT

Not bad for someone with no experience on the field, and basicly in his rookie year.

Never judge a guy based on two extended cameos (i.e. 3 quarters or so of player per game). He still has a noodle arm, waning accuracy and poor fundamentals. He's really a game manager at best.

Though of course, Jim Sorgi did build Rome in a day.

HoopsDemon12
07-06-2007, 12:28 PM
I don't get what you're saying.

LJ ... oh you said LT? haha my bad

Acreboy
07-06-2007, 12:50 PM
This is a filthy lie. Jim Sorgi can throw a ball further than even "Gunslinger" Brett Favre and like someone said earlier, the Colts only play with Peyton because if Sorgi played, it wouldn't be fair to the other teams as Sorgi would average 550 yards and 8 TD per. Hence, the NFL doesn't want such embarassment.

I think Vick at #7 is a mistake there too. I just don't think he's that important to the team. Sorry, but even an average QB could hit 53.8% of his passes. His 1.36:1 TD/INT ratio isn't exactly scorching up the stats either. I know he's a valuable rusher, but so are Warrick Dunn and Jerious Norwood, and they're not playing QB.How dare you interfere with the undying lovefest for Vick on this board.

Dam8610
07-06-2007, 12:52 PM
Though of course, Jim Sorgi did build Rome in a day.

Quit exaggerating...it didn't take him a full day.

Star Wideout
07-06-2007, 12:59 PM
Never judge a guy based on two extended cameos (i.e. 3 quarters or so of player per game). He still has a noodle arm, waning accuracy and poor fundamentals. He's really a game manager at best.

Blasphemy. Jim Sorgi can throw a football from his own end zone to the opposing teams end zone... laying down.

Ewing
07-06-2007, 01:22 PM
Blasphemy. Jim Sorgi can throw a football from his own end zone to the opposing teams end zone... laying down.

...and blindfolded with the entire team distracting him.

Dam8610
07-06-2007, 01:32 PM
...and blindfolded with the entire team distracting him.

...after traveling back in time and building Rome earlier in the day.

Star Wideout
07-06-2007, 01:41 PM
Jim Sorgi's arm is a licensed weapon in 47 States. So by law he is required to only throw at half power. The last receiver that tried to catch a football from Jim Sorgi thrown at full speed had his hands taken straight off and suffered graze wounds to his body.

BamaFalcon59
07-06-2007, 01:43 PM
The South went six games under .500 against non NFC South opponents. That's a pretty bad showing, and the Falcons were beaten badly both times they played the Saints. I don't think Atlanta is better without Vick, but they could be just bad enough to the point where having Vick wouldn't really make much of a difference.

Every team in the NFC South has potential for a .500+ record. Even Tampa due to improved trenches, improvement on defense, and steady players at QB and RB. Not many other divisions do that.

You make us sound horrible. We might not be great in recent years but we are average at least. 26-22 the past 3 seasons, 15-26 the past two seasons. Average. Without Vick we would have top 5 picks every year, just look at our record without him.

Star Wideout
07-06-2007, 02:04 PM
Every team in the NFC South has potential for a .500+ record. Even Tampa due to improved trenches, improvement on defense, and steady players at QB and RB. Not many other divisions do that.

You make us sound horrible. We might not be great in recent years but we are average at least. 26-22 the past 3 seasons, 15-26 the past two seasons. Average. Without Vick we would have top 5 picks every year, just look at our record without him.
This man speaks the truth the last 5 years every team in the NFC South has been to the NFC championship game. Bucs in 2002 and SB winner, Panthers in 2003 and SB participants, Falcons in 2004, Panthers again in 2005, and Saints recently in 2006.

You can count on at least 1 team from the south going deep in the playoffs every year and the division is always super competitive the games are close.

Shiver
07-06-2007, 02:08 PM
This man speaks the truth the last 5 years every team in the NFC South has been to the NFC championship game. Bucs in 2002 and SB winner, Panthers in 2003 and SB participants, Falcons in 2004, Panthers again in 2005, and Saints recently in 2006.

You can count on at least 1 team from the south going deep in the playoffs every year and the division is always super competitive the games are close.

I like to think that injuries are the deciding factor each year. The Saints didn't lose any key players last year, while Carolina and Atlanta did, that's why they were 11-5 and the aforementioned other teams were around the .500 mark.

Acreboy
07-06-2007, 02:19 PM
I like to think that injuries are the deciding factor each year. The Saints didn't lose any key players last year, while Carolina and Atlanta did, that's why they were 11-5 and the aforementioned other teams were around the .500 mark.I'd like to think that the Saints are a good team and that's why they were 11-5.

Dam8610
07-06-2007, 02:49 PM
I'd like to think that the Saints are a good team and that's why they were 11-5.

Weren't the Saints 10-6?

Acreboy
07-06-2007, 02:56 PM
Weren't the Saints 10-6?Yeah, I was making a point

Should have been 11-5 our 2nd and 3rd team played the Panthers last game of the season.

CC.SD
07-06-2007, 02:57 PM
Weren't the Saints 10-6?

Good enough for the Bye in the NFC, and not even guaranteed a wildcard in the AFC.

Acreboy
07-06-2007, 03:01 PM
Good enough for the Bye in the NFC, and not even guaranteed a wildcard in the AFC.Is anyone even saying the NFL is better than the AFC? So no need for making comments like that.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-06-2007, 03:19 PM
At least they'd have a QB playing the QB position.


You've got to be kidding me.

MaxV
07-06-2007, 03:19 PM
The simple fact that Gates is #5 makes this list worthless.

Gates is a great player, no doubt, but without him the Chargers are still a very good team.

Carson Palmer should be MUCH higher. He is the savior for the franchise that was a punch line of many jokes for a long time.

PalmerToCJ
07-06-2007, 03:32 PM
The simple fact that Gates is #5 makes this list worthless.

Gates is a great player, no doubt, but without him the Chargers are still a very good team.

Carson Palmer should be MUCH higher. He is the savior for the franchise that was a punch line of many jokes for a long time.

Agreed. Manning is hands down #1, Brady #2 and Palmer #3. We would be rough to watch without him. TJ/CJ/Rudi/Willie Anderson/Levi Jones can all go down and we can recover but not Carson.

PoopSandwich
07-06-2007, 03:56 PM
If you had to go team by team it would be alot more interesting.

NFC North

Packers - Favre
Vikings - Adrian Peterson??? I have no idea who to put for them, maybe Sharper?
Bears - Benson on O because they don't really have anyone behind him and Grossman hasn't really proven that if they lose him they're scerwed. Urlacher on D.
Lions - Roy Williams

NFC East

Eagles - McNabb
Cowboys - Romo (No one behind him.)
Giants - Strahan? Maybe Eli.
Redskins - Portis? Betts stepped in last year and did decent, so I'm not sure. Maybe Sean Taylor.

NFC West

Seahawks - Alexander
Rams - Bulger
49'rs - Gore
Cardinals - Boldin/Fitzgerald you pick.

NFC South

Saints - Brees
Falcons - Vick
Panthers - S.Smith
Buc's - Cadillac

AFC West

Chargers - LT
Chiefs - LJ
Broncos - Cutler or Bailey.
Raiders - Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hh??? Ashumunga? (I don't remember how to spell his name.)

AFC North

Browns - Kellen Winslow
Bengals - Palmer
Ravens - McNair (Boller is behind him... Boller...)
Steelers - Willie Parker

AFC South

Titans - Vince Young
Colts - Peyton Manning
Jaguars - Byron Leftwich (When healthy hes a good QB.)
Texans - Matt Schaub, I can't believe I'm saying that.

AFC East

Patriots - Brady
Jets - Pennington
Dolphins - Ronnie Brown
Bills - Losman.

People can argue for others but that's my list.

Acreboy
07-06-2007, 04:32 PM
After reading some responses I am convinced LJ is #1. back to back 1700 rushing yards with no receivers and switching QB's.

They still made the playoffs.

scar988
07-06-2007, 04:34 PM
The Falcons look like one of those boom or bust teams right now. I guess the other mediocre teams in their division make them look better than they really are, but if they fall to 5-11 or something like that, it likely wouldn't matter who is playing QB at that point. The team in general doesn't look very good and that includes Vick.

the team looks just fien to me... the DL looks liek it could possibly dominate with Grady Jackson, Rod Coleman, John Abraham and Jamaal Anderson. the linebackers are solid at worst with Keith Brooking, Michael Boley and Demorrio Williams. our secondary doesn't suck anymore with Jimmy Williams, Lawyer Milloy, DeAngelo Hall and Chris Houston. Our OL can actually eat now and isn't a bunch of 280 pounders anymore. the only OL now that's under 300 is the 298 pound Todd McClure. add in that we still have the talented RB's, TE, FB positions. WR is a work in progress btu has a **** ton of potential. the team looks very good on defense right now. but on offense there are some question marks. especially at QB, WR and OL.

GB12
07-06-2007, 04:43 PM
If you had to go team by team it would be alot more interesting.

NFC North

Packers - Favre
Vikings - Adrian Peterson??? I have no idea who to put for them, maybe Sharper?
Bears - Benson on O because they don't really have anyone behind him and Grossman hasn't really proven that if they lose him they're scerwed. Urlacher on D.
Lions - Roy Williams

I disagree with Favre, 3+ years ago yeah if we lost him it'd hurt more than any other player but not now. I'd put Kampman, Driver, Harris, and Woodson before Favre for most indispensible.

Vikings is a tough one, I guess I'd say Winfield. Bears it's Urlacher, without him their defense would be good but no where near elite. For the Lions Roy is their best player but they have CJ and Furrey still behind him, so I'll say Sims

frogstomp
07-06-2007, 04:47 PM
I disagree with #7 the most. They'd be better without him. Also disagree with #5, they could still win 10 games without him.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeff&id=2926319&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1


Wow. Wow wow wow. Why not actually look at their record with and without Vick since he's been in the league?

Oh, right, you'd look like an ass.

Acreboy
07-06-2007, 04:52 PM
Wow. Wow wow wow. Why not actually look at their record with and without Vick since he's been in the league?

Oh, right, you'd look like an ass.The offense is run differently when Vick was in than when Schaub was in. Vick could make plays with his feet. Schaub has mobility, not close to Vick.

Take Vick out of the game and insert anyone else in and the playcalling changes.

Vick is overrated year in and year out.

frogstomp
07-06-2007, 04:55 PM
The offense is run differently when Vick was in than when Schaub was in. Vick could make plays with his feet. Schaub has mobility, not close to Vick.

Take Vick out of the game and insert anyone else in and the playcalling changes.

Vick is overrated year in and year out.


So you're saying when Vick has been injured, the coaching staff didn't change the gameplan at all? It's not like he went out during the game and someone got tossed in. There were months at a time where he was out.

Give me a break, what is with people and being so goddamn ignorant today.

BamaFalcon59
07-06-2007, 04:56 PM
The offense is run differently when Vick was in than when Schaub was in. Vick could make plays with his feet. Schaub has mobility, not close to Vick.

Take Vick out of the game and insert anyone else in and the playcalling changes.

Vick is overrated year in and year out.

The playcalling changes? No duh. You still didn't dispell anything he said.

Our record is horrible without Vick. Enough said.

JK17
07-06-2007, 05:00 PM
The offense is run differently when Vick was in than when Schaub was in. Vick could make plays with his feet. Schaub has mobility, not close to Vick.

Take Vick out of the game and insert anyone else in and the playcalling changes.

Vick is overrated year in and year out.

The offense is run better when Vick is in, because he is a better player. Change the playcalling, and it doesn't matter, the only way it gets better is if they get a better player at QB. But since the Falcons don't have that, and its been shown how bad they play without him, Vick is the most indispensable on that team. It's not like Schaub took over and they kept a running QB mentality.

Unless you really, truly believe that Harrington is better then him, in which case, there's not much that can be said to change your mind, but thats an ignorant statement.

BamaFalcon59
07-06-2007, 05:02 PM
the team looks just fien to me... the DL looks liek it could possibly dominate with Grady Jackson, Rod Coleman, John Abraham and Jamaal Anderson. the linebackers are solid at worst with Keith Brooking, Michael Boley and Demorrio Williams. our secondary doesn't suck anymore with Jimmy Williams, Lawyer Milloy, DeAngelo Hall and Chris Houston. Our OL can actually eat now and isn't a bunch of 280 pounders anymore. the only OL now that's under 300 is the 298 pound Todd McClure. add in that we still have the talented RB's, TE, FB positions. WR is a work in progress btu has a **** ton of potential. the team looks very good on defense right now. but on offense there are some question marks. especially at QB, WR and OL.

We have some strengths but a ton of holes.

Weak spots (potentially)...

NT
LT
RB
WR
DE
CB
FS
and maybe LB depth, although it has improved


We have young players at almost every position who could step up, but that is why I said (potentially).

Acreboy
07-06-2007, 05:05 PM
The offense is run better when Vick is in, because he is a better player. Change the playcalling, and it doesn't matter, the only way it gets better is if they get a better player at QB. But since the Falcons don't have that, and its been shown how bad they play without him, Vick is the most indispensable on that team. It's not like Schaub took over and they kept a running QB mentality.

Unless you really, truly believe that Harrington is better then him, in which case, there's not much that can be said to change your mind, but thats an ignorant statement.
I never said Harrington is better.

He isn't s better player, and Vick isn't a significantly better QB.

So you're saying when Vick has been injured, the coaching staff didn't change the gameplan at all?

No, I didn't say that at all. Read the damn post.

frogstomp
07-06-2007, 05:10 PM
No, I didn't say that at all. Read the damn post.

Well, I have no idea what you're defending your opinion with, then. Just admit you're wrong. It's all good.

JK17
07-06-2007, 05:12 PM
I never said Harrington is better.

He isn't s better player, and Vick isn't a significantly better QB.

Yes, but if you don't think Harrington is better, which he certainly isn't, then that means they are going to take a huge step back if Vick gets hurt, making him very indispensable. If Schaub couldn't win games for the Falcons, how can Harrington, who couldn't win games for anyone really.

Overrated or not, the Falcons cannot afford to lose Vick, he is the team, or at least the offense.

Sniper
07-06-2007, 05:20 PM
If you had to go team by team it would be alot more interesting.

Eagles - McNabb


I love McNabb but there's no way he'd take it over Brian Westbrook or Brian Dawkins. Look at how AJ Feeley and Jeff Garcia did well in the Philly system as long as they had Westbrook in there, They weren't as good as McNabb but they were still able to win games because Westbrook runs our offense. Dawkins, well he's just the heart and soul of the team.

Acreboy
07-06-2007, 06:45 PM
Yes, but if you don't think Harrington is better, which he certainly isn't, then that means they are going to take a huge step back if Vick gets hurt, making him very indispensable. If Schaub couldn't win games for the Falcons, how can Harrington, who couldn't win games for anyone really.

Overrated or not, the Falcons cannot afford to lose Vick, he is the team, or at least the offense.I still don't think he should be on the list at all.

JK17
07-06-2007, 06:49 PM
I still don't think he should be on the list at all.

Okay, I don't really get why, without him the Falcons have little shot at doing anything, but if thats your opinion so be it.

ChampBailey24
07-07-2007, 05:45 PM
Okay, I don't really get why, without him the Falcons have little shot at doing anything, but if thats your opinion so be it.

I agree. He's wrong, but if someone wants to think something, you can't really do anything about it.

Flyboy
07-07-2007, 05:54 PM
I rest my case.

Precisely.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-07-2007, 05:55 PM
The offense is run differently when Vick was in than when Schaub was in. Vick could make plays with his feet. Schaub has mobility, not close to Vick.

Take Vick out of the game and insert anyone else in and the playcalling changes.

Vick is overrated year in and year out.


You honestly have no idea, do you? Take a quick look at the Falcons record without Vick playing.

ChampBailey24
07-07-2007, 06:10 PM
You honestly have no idea, do you? Take a quick look at the Falcons record without Vick playing.

That was already said, and he already ignored it. I advise giving up, because you're fighting a losing battle. You can't convince somebody of something to think something they don't want to think.

Shiver
07-07-2007, 10:16 PM
I'd like to think that the Saints are a good team and that's why they were 11-5.

If the Saints lost Charles Grant and Will Smith, like the Falcons lost Abraham and Kerney, I doubt they would have been 10-6..

Acreboy
07-07-2007, 10:19 PM
Drew Brees Should be high on this list.

Who is his back up?I wanted to say it. I was going to be called a homer though.

TheChampIsHere
07-08-2007, 08:39 AM
I disagree with #7 the most. They'd be better without him. Also disagree with #5, they could still win 10 games without him.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeff&id=2926319&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

nah I cant disagree with Vick. His dissapointing play the last couple years has been a big reason why the Falcons never became the contender they were supposed to be. But he is the franchise player and he is vital to their success. The Falcons will not be a contender until Vick elevates his game or they move on to another QB. On draft day they put their eggs in a basket getting Vick, who was supposed to revolutionize the game and we all know hes been spectacular and dissapointing at the same time, but the Falcons still have their eggs in the Vick basket, as they realize that he is probably the greatest talent the NFL has ever seen and they invested a lot in him and need to see it through.

TheChampIsHere
07-08-2007, 08:43 AM
Yea tho I gotta say that the Gates pick is just stupid. The writer outsmarted himself with the whole they can afford to lose LT b/c of Turner thoughtline. LT was the MVP for a reason and beyond that as good as Gates is, no TE is among the top 5 most indispensible players in the league, because its not that important of a position, even in schemes like the chiefs and chargers where the TE is the go-to guy in the passing game. The Chargers offense, with Rivers, Turner, Rivers, Jackson, rookie Craig Davis, good OL, it would still be one of the most potent in the NFL without Gates. And they got a pretty good TE in the draft so with Chandler and Manumaluena they have some pretty decent backups at TE. Theres just so many guys who are much more indispensible, even if they aren't as surprising picks as Gates...If I was gonna make a surprise pick though it would be Reggie Bush. Sure, Colston, Deuce and Brees put up big numbers but I feel that without Bush' playmaking ability that Saints offense just wouldnt be nearly the same, even when he doesnt touch the ball, he has a dominating presence in games and if not for him I think DCs would be able to stop the Saints offense.

islandboy843
07-08-2007, 08:49 AM
I wanted to say it. I was going to be called a homer though.



Not really. Jamie Martin is.... well Jamie Martin.

T-RICH49
07-08-2007, 09:44 AM
I agree with #1.No LJ= KC being screwed LJ is the most valuable member on the team

stephenson86
07-08-2007, 09:56 AM
i was once sitting watching sorgi play and he threw a pass so hard it came out of the TV and knocked me off my chair

Sniper
07-08-2007, 03:24 PM
i was once sitting watching sorgi play and he threw a pass so hard it came out of the TV and knocked me off my chair

Not surprising one bit. That's what Jim Sorgi does. Jim Sorgi has been known to throw a ball so hard that even God, a great WR in his own right, dropped.

stephenson86
07-08-2007, 06:32 PM
Not surprising one bit. That's what Jim Sorgi does. Jim Sorgi has been known to throw a ball so hard that even God, a great WR in his own right, dropped.

seeing as god = jim sorgi

its amazing he managed to run ahead of his own rocket like pass

Mr. Stiller
07-08-2007, 06:34 PM
Jim Sorgi was originally cast in "Independance Day" and was going to throw rocket passes at Aliens.

Unfortunately.. He really had to save the world... Thats why Will Smith got a job.

Average OT LB
07-13-2007, 03:47 AM
I agree with #1.No LJ= KC being screwed LJ is the most valuable member on the team

First let me start off by saying that LJ is a very valuable player and without him the chiefs might not win a single game. However the way i see it the Chiefs dont have any chance to win the AFC West this year, not with the chargers and broncos standing in their way. Now dont get me wrong mircales do happen, but i wouldnt bet on a bench player like huard leading the team to the playoffs. I thought that an indispensible palyer is one that without him his team does not win whereas if they do have him his team succeeds. But the way i see it, the chiefs either lose with him on the team, or lose without him. Now as far as next year goes, LJ isnt even close to the most indispensible player in the league because it doesnt really matter if he plays or not the teams gonna lose. not to mention hes holding out for more money and has had some problems with his attitude. I'm sure everyone remembers coach vermeil calling a baby or something like that just because LJ was complaining about not getting carries when they had priest holmes.

In my opinion a real indespensible player is someone like drew brees. The saints have a good core but without that guy to run the team they go from super bowl contender to losing record. Hopefully i've completed this post in a concise enough manner so i pass the post-police's thorough inspection.

bored of education
07-13-2007, 08:19 AM
First let me start off by saying that LJ is a very valuable player and without him the chiefs might not win a single game. However the way i see it the Chiefs dont have any chance to win the AFC West this year, not with the chargers and broncos standing in their way. Now dont get me wrong mircales do happen, but i wouldnt bet on a bench player like huard leading the team to the playoffs. I thought that an indispensible palyer is one that without him his team does not win whereas if they do have him his team succeeds. But the way i see it, the chiefs either lose with him on the team, or lose without him. Now as far as next year goes, LJ isnt even close to the most indispensible player in the league because it doesnt really matter if he plays or not the teams gonna lose. not to mention hes holding out for more money and has had some problems with his attitude. I'm sure everyone remembers coach vermeil calling a baby or something like that just because LJ was complaining about not getting carries when they had priest holmes.

In my opinion a real indespensible player is someone like drew brees. The saints have a good core but without that guy to run the team they go from super bowl contender to losing record. Hopefully i've completed this post in a concise enough manner so i pass the post-police's thorough inspection.


They may lose games with him in their. But the games the win are directly correlated with his BEING on the field. The loss of Trent Green freed up 7 mil. Herm likes LJ, likes the beastliness of LJ. Lj was called a baby by whom? The coach that is not their. HE HAD an attitude problem when he was the 2nd man. Now he is the 1st man. Charecter issues are just blown out of porportion about LJ.

LJ's Agent: "I canít say that we are close to a deal now, but Larry wants to be a Chief for life and the Chiefs are a great organization, and I am optimistic that we will come to an agreement."

But yes he is the most valuable member to one team.

Moses
07-13-2007, 09:19 AM
They may lose games with him in their. But the games the win are directly correlated with his BEING on the field. The loss of Trent Green freed up 7 mil. Herm likes LJ, likes the beastliness of LJ. Lj was called a baby by whom? The coach that is not their. HE HAD an attitude problem when he was the 2nd man. Now he is the 1st man. Charecter issues are just blown out of porportion about LJ.

LJ's Agent: "I canít say that we are close to a deal now, but Larry wants to be a Chief for life and the Chiefs are a great organization, and I am optimistic that we will come to an agreement."

But yes he is the most valuable member to one team.

I don't buy it. Runningbacks are a dime a dozen in the NFL and they can be replaced easily.

Quarterbacks are the most indespensable player on the majority of teams. Peyton Manning is easily more important to the Colts than LJ is to the Chiefs.

princefielder28
07-13-2007, 09:35 AM
I don't buy it. Runningbacks are a dime a dozen in the NFL and they can be replaced easily.

Quarterbacks are the most indespensable player on the majority of teams. Peyton Manning is easily more important to the Colts than LJ is to the Chiefs.

Moses you are 100% right, quarterbacks are the most indespenable part of an NFL team. Do the Colts win a Super bowl without Peyton Manning???? Do the Patriots have 3 Super Bowls without Tom Brady??? Do the Eagles go to all those NFC Championship Games without McNabb??? No, No, and No

49erfanatic
07-13-2007, 11:37 AM
Moses you are 100% right, quarterbacks are the most indespenable part of an NFL team. Do the Colts win a Super bowl without Peyton Manning???? Do the Patriots have 3 Super Bowls without Tom Brady??? Do the Eagles go to all those NFC Championship Games without McNabb??? No, No, and No

Could the Bears get to the Super Bowl with some one other than Grossman? Do the Ravens win the superbowl without Trent Dilfer? yes and yes. Also look how well the Chargers did last year after replacing Drew Brees.

I'll agree that because of all the responsibility a QB has, in most cases they are the most indespensable. However, the three teams you listed had offenses built around the QB. An elite running back cannot be underrated. The 49ers wouldn't have won even 5 games last year if it wasn't for Frank Gore, I doubt the Chargers would have reached 13 without LT, and I can nearly guarentee the Cheifs don't sniff the playoffs without Johnson

neko4
07-13-2007, 12:21 PM
Gates should be taken out for LT

Moses
07-13-2007, 12:28 PM
Could the Bears get to the Super Bowl with some one other than Grossman? Do the Ravens win the superbowl without Trent Dilfer? yes and yes. Also look how well the Chargers did last year after replacing Drew Brees.

I'll agree that because of all the responsibility a QB has, in most cases they are the most indespensable. However, the three teams you listed had offenses built around the QB. An elite running back cannot be underrated. The 49ers wouldn't have won even 5 games last year if it wasn't for Frank Gore, I doubt the Chargers would have reached 13 without LT, and I can nearly guarentee the Cheifs don't sniff the playoffs without Johnson

Teams like the Bears and Ravens are in the minority. Grossman played well in spurts last year and that's when the Bears were at their best. Dilfer was a good game manager and had the support of one of the best defences of all-time.

You still cannot tell me that LJ means more to his team than Manning, Brady, Brees, etc.

Average OT LB
07-13-2007, 05:43 PM
Teams like the Bears and Ravens are in the minority. Grossman played well in spurts last year and that's when the Bears were at their best. Dilfer was a good game manager and had the support of one of the best defences of all-time.

You still cannot tell me that LJ means more to his team than Manning, Brady, Brees, etc.

I just dont think its an argument cause the NFL is centered around teams that make the playoffs and in the chiefs case they most likely wont. So is LJ the most indispensible player in the league? no. Is he the most indispensible player on a non-playoff team.. sure maybe, but how do you measure that? 7 wins and not making the playoffs is more successful then 3 wins and not making the playoffs.. its all the same to me.

MaxV
07-13-2007, 06:54 PM
Gates should be taken out for LT

Well the reason they didn't include LT is because of Turner.

Remember that this isn't the best players list.

With that said, Gates isn't that important to a team with a great D and the best RB in the NFL.