PDA

View Full Version : Potential


eaglesfan_45
05-03-2008, 11:24 AM
Who do you guys think is the team with the most potential to be great in a couple of years?

I think the Raiders have the most potential because they have three players in particular that have an absolute ton of potential in McFadden, Bush, and Russell. If all of them develop I think they could be great in a couple of years.

Another team with alot of potential is the Falcons, they have their 2 back system in place and they have a young franchise QB in Matt Ryan. They also have to offensive lineman with potential: Justin Blalock, and Sam Baker.

PACKmanN
05-03-2008, 11:26 AM
Kansas City without a question.

Thunder&Lightning
05-03-2008, 11:35 AM
The Raiders do if they improve their offensive line.

eaglesfan_45
05-03-2008, 11:39 AM
Kansas City without a question.

Thats what I was thinking but they don't have a franchise QB and that is what I think really takes them out of the race because they have guys like Dorsey and Albert who have loads of potential, but they don't have a QB with a ton of potential like Oakland or Atlanta and a QB is the leader of a team so....

but that is just my opinion.

LonghornsLegend
05-03-2008, 11:52 AM
Thats what I was thinking but they don't have a franchise QB and that is what I think really takes them out of the race because they have guys like Dorsey and Albert who have loads of potential, but they don't have a QB with a ton of potential like Oakland or Atlanta and a QB is the leader of a team so....

but that is just my opinion.


Why does everyone keep assuming Croyle can't be a good NFL QB? It seems like everyone always assumes so quick on a QB that wasn't a 1st rd pick, and then when its a 1st rd pick everyone will say "he's still developing", you dont think Croyle needs time to learn and develop too? He's only been in the nfl 2 years, one was a redshirt year, this past one he didn't even start half the season and he was with no LJ, no LT, and a terrible overall O line with a rookie WR still developing himself.


It's a little early to judge him, and to act like he won't get better just because he wasn't drafted in the top 10...He has a cannon for an arm, and showed flashes of some potential, he's not a lock to be a success but it would be stupid to act like he has no shot of being a good starter in this league with weapons around him.

djp
05-03-2008, 12:05 PM
I will be a homer and say the Vikings.. if Tarvaris can continue to progress each year, in 3 years, the Vikings will be scary.

The Unseen
05-03-2008, 01:02 PM
teh jagz obviusli

...but rly, this is the zenith of their talent. The defense will start wearing out soon (started last year), and the offense will probably go through an "adjustment period" soon. Things may not be that bad, though, if the young defensive talent steps up. Also, MJD will be in his prime in a few years.

Brent
05-03-2008, 01:04 PM
Potential wont win games for the Raiders. I don't think Russell is going to pan out.

tjsunstein
05-03-2008, 01:07 PM
The Packers wont match their great success this year, but they will still be very good in 3-4 years once either Rodgers or Brohm take the snaps regularly. They have all the makings if they invest in a younger offensive line in the next year or two.

My non biased opinion will go to the Jets. No one remembers that they had a playoff run a couple years back. The QB situation is a problem as well as working in the new 3-4 defense. Look for them in a couple years when Brady's empire starts to fall.

tjsunstein
05-03-2008, 01:08 PM
Potential wont win games for the Raiders. I don't think Russell is going to pan out.

I've been saying this from day one. Russell, in my opinion, wont work out in the NFL. He has all the physical makings but he cant make the reads.

Number 10
05-03-2008, 01:09 PM
Easy.

Look for the teams that are strong in the trenches on both sides of the ball and have a good young QB. That's the formula.

Dr. Gonzo
05-03-2008, 01:27 PM
I am going to say the Vikings. They are great in the trenches and Tarvaris Jackson has a lot of potential. That is not to say they will be great. Jackson still sucks and while we do have a lot of young talent at WR and in a couple years that can be one of our strong points Berrian has yet to play a down here while Rice and Allison are still developing. I really do think that if we get good QB play, AD isn't injured, and we play up to our potential we will be one of the best teams in the league. Then again this could all be the homer in me talking.

Besides the Vikings I really like the potential of the Chiefs and Jets.

Kurve
05-03-2008, 01:33 PM
I've been saying this from day one. Russell, in my opinion, wont work out in the NFL. He has all the physical makings but he cant make the reads.


He played a little last year and from what i saw last year is very promising he seemed very relaxed and didnt become rattled under pressure like some would think out of a rookie. With more experience i think he will be even more comfortable taking snaps he has the arm and accuracy to be a great qb in this league. I think people think he will fail is that he has this carefree look to him almost as if he doesnt seem to care either way but i think thats just the way he is but you need a qb that can shrug mistakes off and not get bothered by them and move on.

Shane P. Hallam
05-03-2008, 01:39 PM
To pick a team picking Top Ten, I'll say Atlanta and here is why.

You discuss that potential with the Raiders, but Atlanta has a big three on offense in Ryan, Turner and White. Likewise, if everyone is wrong about Sam Baker, this offense has the potential to be beastly.

Looking on the other side, their front 7 is alright if they can get a DT next year, and secondary should be able to be rebuilt. I think Atlanta can do damage in 3-4 years.

Vikes99ej
05-03-2008, 01:50 PM
I will be a homer and say the Vikings.. if Tarvaris can continue to progress each year, in 3 years, the Vikings will be scary.

I hope we're still in Minnesota in 3 years, or I won't give a ****.

TheGreatEscape
05-03-2008, 02:14 PM
The Giants? Eli is entering his prime, the oline is hitting its prime, toomer will be gone and plax will have slown down a steep but boss and smith should be breaking out with hopefully another young WR and a still productive shocked that O should be very good and if we can somehow keep spags around the d should be even better. We're a top team and Reece is still building us to get better.

skinzzfan25
05-03-2008, 02:20 PM
I really like what the Texans are doing.

They've got a fantastic young front defense with Okoye, Ryans and Williams. Plus, everybody on that team seems to be extremely fast. Schaub is coming into his own and Andre Johnson should be back in action this season. The ZBS should be in full swing this season, but I don't know how well Green/Brown can run it. I think that they're gonna be the best team to not make the playoffs this season, Jax and Colts are too much to get by this season.

EDIT: I know 8-8 teams aren't really that much of a 'sleeper team,' but I think they could have an elite defense and a more than sufficient offense in a year or two.

I'd like to say the Redskins, but we need to add more youth and see if Campbell and Zorn work well together.

CC.SD
05-03-2008, 02:26 PM
I'm really high on Minny right now. Anyone boosting the Raiders is forgetting that they are the Raiders.

I'm pretty sure five years down the line Raiders fans are gonna be looking at Brady Quinn and Glenn Dorsey going "What happened?" In addition to wondering how they were the pretty much the only team not to draft a great player in 2004, getting Gallery instead. Or spending the 7th on Michael Huff. Or blowing another 7th overall on Randy Moss. Or letting Gruden go so he could stomp on Gannon's brain.

Man.

Yatta!
05-03-2008, 02:47 PM
I'm not sure about all this love for the Vikings, yeah if Jackson develops then they'll definitely be a top team but several of their top players are quite old and AD is the only guy with massive 'potential'.

BaLLiN
05-03-2008, 02:49 PM
Giants have potential, they won the superbowl and were the 3rd youngest team in the league

Geo
05-03-2008, 02:53 PM
I'd like to see a reference for that (Giants third youngest), because I don't believe it.

Edit: Like I figured.

As of Jan 30th when John Clayton wrote his article (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs07/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=3221211):

2007
Green Bay* 13 3 25.72
Indianapolis* 13 3 25.74
Cincinnati 7 9 26.08
Dallas* 13 3 26.08
Carolina 7 9 26.17
Arizona 8 8 26.21
San Diego* 11 5 26.23
N.Y. Giants* 10 6 26.26
Minnesota 8 8 26.28
Buffalo 7 9 26.33

BaLLiN
05-03-2008, 02:56 PM
I'd like to see a reference for that (Giants third youngest), because I don't believe it.

it was said quite a bit last year, ill try to find it, im sure some giants fans could back me up on it.

SaintsMan
05-03-2008, 02:57 PM
I think the Saints could be a great team next season or so, if we keep improving the roster.

mqtirishfan
05-03-2008, 02:58 PM
I love Houston a few years down the road, because if you go off of potential, they have all the major spots filled.

QB- Schaub is considered a franchise guy, and has all the tools you look for.

RB- Biggest flaw on the team, IMO. Darius Walker could be a great second option and target out of the backfield like Kevin Faulk, but they need a big RB. If they could get Beanie Wells, they'd be set. Steve Slaton could be a productive role player as well.

WR- Andre Johnson is a freak of nature, and they have a couple of guys with some potential/speed behind him.

TE- Owen Daniels could be one of the best TEs in the NFL fairly soon.

OL- Duane Brown is very athletic and perfect for the ZBS. The rest of the line is filled with young guys with potential like Winston and Spencer. Still, they need to fill out the interior.

DL- This team could simply be outstanding on the D-Line for years. I think Mario Williams could be the very best DE in the NFL as soon as the end of this year, and Okoye is very good. This is a do-or-die season for Travis Johnson, but he does have the ability to make things happen, he just hasn't shown it. Okam also has some potential. They do need to add one more DE to the group, because Anthony Weaver isn't all that great.

LB- Ryans is a stud, and should be an all-pro for years at MLB. Xavier Adibi is a very talented rookie, and Morlon Greenwood is only 30. He's certainly no star, but he's a decent starting option.

DB- Wildcard on this team. Dunta Robinson has had some issues, and needs to establish himself as a number 1 CB. Fred Lewis and Antwuan Molden both have a lot of talent, and are great options in the secondary. I think C.C. Brown can be a decent starter in this league, but they should look to improve the safety spot in the draft.

Geo
05-03-2008, 02:58 PM
Check the edited post post, B. Clayton wrote an article before the Super Bowl.

BaLLiN
05-03-2008, 02:59 PM
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/profootball/nationalfootballleague/newyorkgiants/index.html

1st sentence in the NY Times.

http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story;jsessionid=1B47F53D213EC6115AC6180A73B67050? id=09000d5d806577eb&template=with-video&confirm=true

NFL.com one of the last few paragraphs.

With the undefeated Patriots on top, the Giants, who came into the season as the third-youngest team in the NFL, will look to draw even more on the experience of Strahan and Toomer.

there's my proof Geo

Geo
05-03-2008, 03:03 PM
I'll trust the article with actual statistics than NY trash. And makes more sense, because there's no way the Giants are that young.

Steve Slaton could be a productive role player as well.
The Texans taking Slaton with the 89th pick is the best RB move they've made since drafting Domanick Davis with the 101st pick in 2003.

BaLLiN
05-03-2008, 03:06 PM
[QUOTE=Geo;1054234]I'll trust the article with actual statistics than NY trash. And makes more sense, because there's no way the Giants are that young.QUOTE]

NFL.com also said it....

Geo
05-03-2008, 03:09 PM
The Giants have too much experience/years to be that young - the OL, Madison and McQuarters, Pierce, Strahan, Toomer, Burress, Shockey. They don't have a lot of over-the-hill guys, and they have a lot of young guys, but not enough to bring down the average.

Now if guys like Strahan and Toomer were to retire, they would bring the number down.

Rob S
05-03-2008, 03:19 PM
**homer** If Trent Edwards turns out to be even a decent QB (a big if, but so is Russel), I think the Bills can be a playoff team for a long time. Especially with some money coming in from the Toronto games**END homer**

BaLLiN
05-03-2008, 03:19 PM
The Giants have too much experience/years to be that young - the OL, Madison and McQuarters, Pierce, Strahan, Toomer, Burress, Shockey. They don't have a lot of over-the-hill guys, and they have a lot of young guys, but not enough to bring down the average.

Now if guys like Strahan and Toomer were to retire, they would bring the number down.

Well i would trust NFL.com, I think they should know. But this year they are most definitely not in the top 5 youngest teams.

kmartin575
05-03-2008, 03:20 PM
The Raiders do if they improve their offensive line.

That's like saying ________ does if they get a good team.

kmartin575
05-03-2008, 03:22 PM
Thats what I was thinking but they don't have a franchise QB and that is what I think really takes them out of the race because they have guys like Dorsey and Albert who have loads of potential, but they don't have a QB with a ton of potential like Oakland or Atlanta and a QB is the leader of a team so....

but that is just my opinion.

So what makes Jamarcus Russell or Matt Ryan have more potential than Croyle? I realize NFL teams think they do because they were taken in the 1st round, but I am asking for a specific reason. I know as far as arm strength goes Brodie Croyle blows Ryan out of the water and isn't far off from Jamarcus Russell in that category. If Croyle was 20 (or 80 pounds heavier in Russell's case) would he be a better prospect?

bigbluedefense
05-03-2008, 03:23 PM
The Giants have too much experience/years to be that young - the OL, Madison and McQuarters, Pierce, Strahan, Toomer, Burress, Shockey. They don't have a lot of over-the-hill guys, and they have a lot of young guys, but not enough to bring down the average.

Now if guys like Strahan and Toomer were to retire, they would bring the number down.

The oline is fairly young outside of McKenzie. He's our only old starter, and all our backups are young too. Seuburt is aging as well, but again, you look at the guys behind him and theyre all young.

Our WR core outside of Toomer and Burress are all young. TEs are somewhat young, young qb, dline is all young except for Strahan and Robbins, LB core is all young except for Pierce (this is all including backups btw), RBs are young, DBs are young (Madison and McQuarters might not even be on the team next year), the Giants are certainly a very young team.

On our 53 man roster, I think only perhaps about 8 guys on the whole roster if that have more than 8 years of experience.

Geo
05-03-2008, 03:27 PM
I'm not calling the G-Men old. Just not young enough to be the third-youngest team in the league, reading that didn't seem kosher. And per Clayton crunching the numbers, they're the 8th youngest team in the league, which sounds more right.

bigbluedefense
05-03-2008, 03:30 PM
I'm not calling the G-Men old. Just not young enough to be the third-youngest team in the league, reading that didn't seem kosher. And per Clayton crunching the numbers, they're the 8th youngest team in the league, which sounds more right.

hmm, im guessing the 3 youngest are GB, Dallas, and Oakland?

BaLLiN
05-03-2008, 03:31 PM
I'm not calling the G-Men old. Just not young enough to be the third-youngest team in the league, reading that didn't seem kosher. And per Clayton crunching the numbers, they're the 8th youngest team in the league, which sounds more right.

i didnt say that they are the 3rd youngest this year, i said they WERE the 3rd youngest team LAST year

Rob S
05-03-2008, 03:33 PM
This whole potential thing is overvalued by some people i think. For instance, Russel could easily bust (I happen to think he will), same goes for almost any of these other players. I think for this argument u need a team with a good mix of safer players and high bust rate players. Its fine to talk about potential (hell, what else is the NFL draft), but you have to acknowledge what type of potential you are dealing with before selecting a team in this kind of debate.

For instance, the whole Brodie Croyle thing. Jamarcus is considered to have more potential because he is a physical specimen. He is huge, has a cannon arm and physically is everything u look for, essentially the prototype nfl QB from a physical standpoint. Brodie is further from that prototype, but still has some skills that give him high potential. Now, Matt Ryan may have less potential than both of them. If Brodie or Russel can put it all together, physically they may be more gifted than Ryan. But, imo Ryan is still overall, a better piece for a young franchise. He is a pretty safe pick (for a QB anyways) and I think he will be solid. I think his bust rate is a lot lower than the other two. And that is what i think u need when starting a franchise, safe players rather than boom or busts. Getting a solid cor in place is essential, then u can roll the dice on players.

Geo
05-03-2008, 03:33 PM
On our 53 man roster, I think only perhaps about 8 guys on the whole roster if that have more than 8 years of experience.
17 Burress, Plaxico WR 6-5 232 30 9 Michigan St
22 Droughns, Reuben RB 5-11 220 29 9 Oregon
18 Feagles, Jeff P 6-1 215 42 21 Miami
29 Madison, Sam CB 5-11 180 34 12 Louisville
25 McQuarters, R.W. CB 5-10 194 31 11 Oklahoma State
60 O'Hara, Shaun C 6-3 303 30 9 Rutgers
98 Robbins, Fred DT 6-4 317 31 9 Wake Forest
65 Ruegamer, Grey G 6-4 299 31 10 Arizona State
92 Strahan, Michael DE 6-5 255 36 16 Texas Southern
81 Toomer, Amani WR 6-3 203 33 13 Michigan
2 Wright, Anthony QB 6-1 211 32 10 South Carolina

I count eleven guys, BBD. Don't kick yourself though, you aren't the first nor the last Giants fan who gets it wrong when it comes to reality.

Also, the Giants added the following this season:

55 Clark, Danny LB 6-2 245 30 9 Illinois
26 Knight, Sammy S 6-1 215 32 12 USC

Geo
05-03-2008, 03:34 PM
hmm, im guessing the 3 youngest are GB, Dallas, and Oakland?

i didnt say that they are the 3rd youngest this year, i said they WERE the 3rd youngest team LAST year
Look at the chart I copied/pasted on the first page, people. There are actual numbers there.

kmartin575
05-03-2008, 03:38 PM
I don't even know why the youngest teams from last year even matter. With the draft just happening alot of teams just got alot younger. Somebody mentioned on a Chiefs website the other day that the average age of our team is currently just over 25 years old. I am sure there are other teams that just got alot younger as well.

bigbluedefense
05-03-2008, 03:42 PM
17 Burress, Plaxico WR 6-5 232 30 9 Michigan St
22 Droughns, Reuben RB 5-11 220 29 9 Oregon
18 Feagles, Jeff P 6-1 215 42 21 Miami
29 Madison, Sam CB 5-11 180 34 12 Louisville
25 McQuarters, R.W. CB 5-10 194 31 11 Oklahoma State
60 O'Hara, Shaun C 6-3 303 30 9 Rutgers
98 Robbins, Fred DT 6-4 317 31 9 Wake Forest
65 Ruegamer, Grey G 6-4 299 31 10 Arizona State
92 Strahan, Michael DE 6-5 255 36 16 Texas Southern
81 Toomer, Amani WR 6-3 203 33 13 Michigan
2 Wright, Anthony QB 6-1 211 32 10 South Carolina

I count eleven guys, BBD. Don't kick yourself though, you aren't the first nor the last Giants fan who gets it wrong when it comes to reality.

Also, the Giants added the following this season:

55 Clark, Danny LB 6-2 245 30 9 Illinois
26 Knight, Sammy S 6-1 215 32 12 USC

Damn, i forgot about a lot of guys. Hopefully Wright and Droughns gets cut this year. I wouldn't mind seeing McQuarters go too, but Id like to keep Madison just for veteran leadership, he can mentor the young guys.

Im hoping Knight can mentor Phillips, and Madison can mentor Ross and Terrell Thomas, Pierce mentor Goff etc. Im really high on Goff, I think he's going to be a steal and fits our scheme like a glove. He won't see the field right away though bc of Pierce. I wonder how many years Pierce has left in the tank, and how the Giants will approach him when the time comes.

Bengalsrocket
05-03-2008, 03:42 PM
if we're talking potential to be contender for the superbowl, I don't think any team with the names Jamarcus Russel, Matt Ryan or Brodie Croyle can be said for the next 2-3 years.

I'm not saying its impossible for them to make a run, but just very unlikely. It'll probably take Matt Ryan 4-5 years to be considered in the 1st / 2nd tier of QB's (depending on who's retired by then). As far as Russel, I just don't know, he could be surrounded by a great or a terrible team because the raiders change so quickly it seems that you never know if he's going to be in a great situation or not. And for Croyle, he's got a lot of young talent around him, he may or may not make it as a QB, but even if he does, him and his team will need time to learn the game at the pro level and become veterans.

PACKmanN
05-03-2008, 03:46 PM
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/profootball/nationalfootballleague/newyorkgiants/index.html

1st sentence in the NY Times.

http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story;jsessionid=1B47F53D213EC6115AC6180A73B67050? id=09000d5d806577eb&template=with-video&confirm=true

NFL.com one of the last few paragraphs.



there's my proof Geo

when did the Giants ever have a younger team then the Packers?

Geo
05-03-2008, 03:47 PM
Damn, i forgot about a lot of guys. Hopefully Wright and Droughns gets cut this year. I wouldn't mind seeing McQuarters go too, but Id like to keep Madison just for veteran leadership, he can mentor the young guys.

Im hoping Knight can mentor Phillips, and Madison can mentor Ross and Terrell Thomas, Pierce mentor Goff etc. Im really high on Goff, I think he's going to be a steal and fits our scheme like a glove. He won't see the field right away though bc of Pierce. I wonder how many years Pierce has left in the tank, and how the Giants will approach him when the time comes.
You know I couldn't help but rib. :p

Wright should definitely be gone, and so should Carr imo (who has 7-years exp). Woodson def has to be kept on the roster, I can't believe he fell as far as he did. I just don't understand that at all.

I'd say Droughns too, but he might be the least injury-prone back on the Giants right now. Still, I'd rather give the ball to Jacobs/Ward/Bradshaw instead, I'm with you there. Only so many backs a team can keep, especially if they also use a fullback.

I wonder if the Giants might have wanted Phillip Wheeler, but oh well. Goff is a very solid mid-round pick.

fenikz
05-03-2008, 03:51 PM
Arizona Cardinals, the defense is looking much improved over last year and the offense is already scary, all we need is a compliment to Edge

bigbluedefense
05-03-2008, 03:54 PM
You know I couldn't help but rib. :p

Wright should definitely be gone, and so should Carr imo (who has 7-years exp). Woodson def has to be kept on the roster, I can't believe he fell as far as he did. I just don't understand that at all.

I'd say Droughns too, but he might be the least injury-prone back on the Giants right now. Still, I'd rather give the ball to Jacobs/Ward/Bradshaw instead, I'm with you there. Only so many backs a team can keep, especially if they also use a fullback.

I wonder if the Giants might have wanted Phillip Wheeler, but oh well. Goff is a very solid mid-round pick.

haha, you know i dont take it to the heart :)

From my understanding, Reese mentioned that there is no distinction between strongside and weakside in our scheme, and the requirements are primarily run stuffers who can play downhill and rush the passer. Thats why we went after good run stuffers who can play downhill and have good instincts with our LB selections. And if we want a speedster out there, we have Wilk already on the roster.

Goff is Pierce's replacement at MIKE however. He's the type of smart sledgehammer our scheme requires. We put a lot of mental responsibility on the MIKE, Goff will basically be a younger Pierce when the time is right.

As for Woodson, Im just as surprised as you are. As you know, I was very high on him before the draft. Im surprised he fell so far. Im hoping he can develop like Schaub did and perhaps we can trade him away later on down the road for some draft picks, and maximize our investment that way. For a 6th, Im very pleased that Reese took him. Like yourself, I liked Woodson a lot.

Good point on Droughns too.

BaLLiN
05-03-2008, 04:21 PM
when did the Giants ever have a younger team then the Packers?

when did i say that?

PACKmanN
05-03-2008, 04:24 PM
when did i say that?

nvm, read it wrong.

BaLLiN
05-03-2008, 04:37 PM
Look at the chart I copied/pasted on the first page, people. There are actual numbers there.

well then there's something wrong, i wouldnt say the giants are young, but id definitely say they have very young potential starters.
examples:

All of these guys are 5 years or younger in the league and could be starting/have started for us.

1. Brandon Jacobs
2. Ahmad Bradshaw
3. Kevin Boss
4. David Diehl
5. Chris Snee
6. Aaron Ross
7. Corey Webster
8. Michael Johnson
9. Kevin Dockery
10. Gerris Wilkerson
11. Mathias Kiwanuka
12. Osi Umenyiora
13. Barry Coefield
14. Eli Manning
15. Gibril Wilson (NOT ON THE TEAM ANYMORE) so now Kenny Phillips
16. James Butler
17. Jay Alford
18. Steve Smith
19. Derrick Ward
20. Justin Tuck
21. Guy Whimper
22. Madison Hedgecock
23. Chase Blackburn

And now along with our draft class...
24. Terrell Thomas
25. Jonathan Goff
26. Mario Manningham
27. URFA DJ Hall/Wallace Gilberry

and im being serious with the Hall WR and Gilberry DT most likely

d34ng3l021
05-03-2008, 04:51 PM
I am pretty sure every team in the league can make a case to have the highest potential, but I am tempted to go with the Raiders. But the only reason I wont do so is because I dont think their lines are solid, and who knows if they are even going to address those spots.

The teams that I would go with are the Vikings and (of course) Falcons. I really like the Vikings lines and Adrian Peterson. Sure its an old way of looking at things, but I think with good lines and a great running game, you really have a solid foundation. What I am worried about is their age. Pat Williams (a more important DL than Kevin Williams to me) is getting up there in age, and who knows where he will be in 5 years.

For the Falcons, I would say that we have alot of young guys with potential at alot of solid positions. Jamaal Anderson, despite his lack of production as a rookie, he still has some potential. Hopefully he can end up like Justin Smith. We need alot of help at DT, but elsewhere we look pretty good for the future. Boley is a great OLB. Lofton looks like a future stud at MLB. Chris Houston has a great future. Erik Coleman looks to be pretty solid-good. On the offensive side of the ball, we have a potential franchise LT, a run blocking LG, franchise QB, great WR, and a good RB duo.

LonghornsLegend
05-03-2008, 05:51 PM
I like the potential of the Browns, especially now that Crennel is finally getting pieces to the defense together...Im really interested in how well Rogers plays at NT this year, and they might have one of the best complete O lines in the game...Stallworth opposite Edwards should be pretty sick.


Also no one has mentioned Miami but I like where their headed, Ronnie Brown will have a great run blocking line in front of him, and some backs to rotate, as well as the foundation of their D line in place...It's already a good situation for both QB's, as well as the skill position players they should add next year...Imagine somebody like Maualuga being able to roam free with the down lineman taking on blockers, some things I don't agree with that Parcells does, but he knows how to build a foundation for a team and make the most of having alot of draft picks.

Geo
05-03-2008, 05:56 PM
Browns have the best OL in the game imo.

All they need is a back to follow J-Lew and some more corners.

BlindSite
05-03-2008, 06:41 PM
I'd say the Panthers window will probably be open for the next 3 years. If everything clicks which is a big if, I'll admit they'll be a force.

In the future though there's going to need to be some smart maneuvering with the secondary. Lucas will be out of contract next year, Gamble the year after and marshall the year after that.

Delhomme is 33 next year.

Steve Smith can't stay that fast, that strong and that good for 5 years, probably another 3-4 max.

We still need a young WR2. With Hackett being injury prone and Muhummad 35.

I like the team now though, a lot of youth and depth at RB, LB, DLine, OLine, Safety, Tight End, every where except WR and QB and that can be fixed.

throwback54milkman
05-03-2008, 06:54 PM
the jets young defense has a lot of potential with Gholston, Harris, Jenkins, Pace, Revis, and Rhodes

T-RICH49
05-03-2008, 07:59 PM
the thing Herm has said publicly on Brodie is he needs better weapons around him.remember he never started a game last year with LJ in the back field.improved OL+healthy LJ = hopfully improving Brodie Croyle

RCAChainGang
05-03-2008, 08:03 PM
Kansas City without a doubt.

Glenn Dorsey and Brandon flowers will pwn on D.

They already have Dwayne Bowe who was a boom of a pick. They had the best draft IMO.

I'm liking Brodie Croyle's play at QB also.

BufFan71
05-03-2008, 08:03 PM
the homerism is strong in this thread

eaglesfan_45
05-03-2008, 08:29 PM
Why does everyone keep assuming Croyle can't be a good NFL QB? It seems like everyone always assumes so quick on a QB that wasn't a 1st rd pick, and then when its a 1st rd pick everyone will say "he's still developing", you dont think Croyle needs time to learn and develop too? He's only been in the nfl 2 years, one was a redshirt year, this past one he didn't even start half the season and he was with no LJ, no LT, and a terrible overall O line with a rookie WR still developing himself.


It's a little early to judge him, and to act like he won't get better just because he wasn't drafted in the top 10...He has a cannon for an arm, and showed flashes of some potential, he's not a lock to be a success but it would be stupid to act like he has no shot of being a good starter in this league with weapons around him.


I never said he can't be a good NFL QB I simply said that i don't think he has as much potential as a Jamarcus Russell, Matt Ryan, or Brady Quinn.


Oh and for those of you who have been bashing Russell, potential doesn't mean they are going to be great it simply means that -

capable of being or becoming
a latent excellence or ability that may or may not be
Capable of being but not yet in existence

Zbikowski_9
05-03-2008, 08:58 PM
I'm not sure about all this love for the Vikings, yeah if Jackson develops then they'll definitely be a top team but several of their top players are quite old and AD is the only guy with massive 'potential'.

They have ageing guys but each already has their replacemnt developing.





The Raiders have the most 'potential' but it is all boom or bust potential, if only their managment knew the importance of the trenches.



My pick is the Bills. Like what their doing - good youth and solid in the places that count. Coul do with a young pass rushing DE in next years draft.

BamaFalcon59
05-03-2008, 09:08 PM
Atlanta

Matt Ryan
Michael Turner
Jerious Norwood
Roddy White
Laurent Robinson
Harry Douglas
Ovie Mughelli
Justin Blalock
Sam Baker

Curtis Lofton
John Abraham
Chris Houston
Jamaal Anderson
Michael Boley
John Babineaux
Erik Coleman
Chevis Jackson

If even half of our young players turn out well we could be very good.

LonghornsLegend
05-03-2008, 09:53 PM
I'd say the Panthers window will probably be open for the next 3 years. If everything clicks which is a big if, I'll admit they'll be a force.

In the future though there's going to need to be some smart maneuvering with the secondary. Lucas will be out of contract next year, Gamble the year after and marshall the year after that.

Delhomme is 33 next year.

Steve Smith can't stay that fast, that strong and that good for 5 years, probably another 3-4 max.

We still need a young WR2. With Hackett being injury prone and Muhummad 35.

I like the team now though, a lot of youth and depth at RB, LB, DLine, OLine, Safety, Tight End, every where except WR and QB and that can be fixed.


Have you ever tried mentioning another team or player outside of your own in a thread?

BlindSite
05-03-2008, 10:44 PM
the homerism is strong in this thread

Everyone should just say their team sucks.

The way that's thrown around "homerism" is stupid, people support their teams for a reason, they're always going to be optimistic, if you don't want to hear it then don't post on any football forum, anywhere on the internet.

Have you ever tried mentioning another team or player outside of your own in a thread?

Can you stop the vendetta against me, every thread you flame away like a troll.

My posts are probably 50.50 about my team or the rest of the league. If someone says something I disagree with about the Panthers or a player I'm going to put forward an argument.

That said.

I really like the potential of the Browns for the future. They've started to click, but I can see them faltering a little bit because though Anderson has done a lot of good, he's still easily rattled and turns over the ball way too much.

I think when Quinn takes the reins we'll see a better team than the Browns have now in a few years.

LonghornsLegend
05-03-2008, 11:26 PM
Can you stop the vendetta against me, every thread you flame away like a troll.

U Mad?


I just asked a question, I wouldnt use the term "vendetta" because your certainly not anywhere that important, I was just wondering if it was possible for you to speak on another team or player...Yes you can talk about your team and players, but I was just curious if being a homer ever got old, thats all.

Rob S
05-04-2008, 02:44 AM
I never said he can't be a good NFL QB I simply said that i don't think he has as much potential as a Jamarcus Russell, Matt Ryan, or Brady Quinn.


Oh and for those of you who have been bashing Russell, potential doesn't mean they are going to be great it simply means that -

capable of being or becoming
a latent excellence or ability that may or may not be
Capable of being but not yet in existence


Yeah, but if we deal strictly in potential, this is kind of useless isnt it? I mean, potential is present in everyone, BUT reaching that potential is what will make each player a success. For this debate its not just about who has the best potential, I think it is even more important to assess whether or not a player will reach that potential. In Russel's case, I have never liked him to become a good QB in the NFL. Therefore I cant go with the Raiders. However, the Raiders would be a good pick based on potential alone......see what I am saying?

Bengalsrocket
05-04-2008, 04:43 AM
Obviously KC / Oakland, but in the interest of continuing this thread, I'm going to go with the Titans. They've got a young QBoTF in Vince Young, their defense is solid (if there was a lesson to be learned this year, its never underestimate the power of the defensive line) and they have have fairly solid rushing attack. So they need to address the WR position the most, which they didn't do in this draft, sadly.

BlindSite
05-04-2008, 04:45 AM
U Mad?


I just asked a question, I wouldnt use the term "vendetta" because your certainly not anywhere that important, I was just wondering if it was possible for you to speak on another team or player...Yes you can talk about your team and players, but I was just curious if being a homer ever got old, thats all.

Whatever dude, I'm not going to feed you, I talk about other teams as much as I do the Panthers.

Gay Ork Wang
05-04-2008, 05:13 AM
Whatever dude, I'm not going to feed you, I talk about other teams as much as I do the Panthers.
Its just funny, in a thread about potential, u talk about why the Panthers will be bad in a couple of years...

Michigan
05-04-2008, 07:51 AM
the lions have the potential to be 7-9 or 8-8 in a couple of years.

BlindSite
05-04-2008, 06:04 PM
Its just funny, in a thread about potential, u talk about why the Panthers will be bad in a couple of years...

Yet I'm still a mindless homer, gotta love it don't you.

Yung Flippa
05-04-2008, 06:12 PM
DB- Wildcard on this team. Dunta Robinson has had some issues, and needs to establish himself as a number 1 CB. Fred Lewis and Antwuan Molden both have a lot of talent, and are great options in the secondary. I think C.C. Brown can be a decent starter in this league, but they should look to improve the safety spot in the draft.

Did you mean Fred Bennett?

BrownsTown
05-04-2008, 06:15 PM
Vikings and (homer alert) Browns have young teams with a lot of pieces already in place.

brat316
05-04-2008, 06:16 PM
Dwayne Jarrett sucks

Addict
05-04-2008, 06:32 PM
Depending how their picks pan out, I'll say KC. The browns come to mind, even though they still have some holes (not having any picks in the first 3 rounds hurt them I think), I think a case could be made for GB, but it really depends on Rodgers being good (Brohm is a rookie, rookie QB's don't do well generally).

Bills2083
05-04-2008, 06:43 PM
homer...
I think the Bills have a great potential if Edwards becomes a solid QB. Yes, that is easier said than done, but I think he can. He showed good accuracy, great poise, and adequate arm strength last year. We have a good, young Oline (last year, we allowed the fewest sacks for our team in a long time...10 years maybe?). We just need to upgrade the center position IMO. We have a good RB tandem in Lynch and Jackson, and if Hardy pans out, we will have a pretty good WR core. We just need to upgrade the TE position and Center, and we'll be set.

On defense, we have a good, young set of linebackers in Mitchell, Crowell, and Posluszny. If McKelvin pans out, we will have a good set of defensive backs...(McKelvin, McGee, Simpson, and Whitner). Stroud should be the anchor of our Dline, and he will allow for Schobel/Ellis and Kelsay/Denney to wreak havoc in the backfield. McCargo really started to come on strong last season, and having a big body next to him should only help.

Our special teams are great, with Moorman, Lindell, and McKelvin/McGee/Parrish returning punts and kickoffs. Bobby April has a lot to play with for these upcoming seasons.

no love
05-04-2008, 06:48 PM
If you are talking about o-line potential you gotta include the 49ers in the conversation. They have invested a lot in improving that offensive line and let the young guys learn under stop gaps like Larry Allen.

Chilo Rachal G: 2nd round, 39 overall
Cody Wallace C: 4th round 107 overall
Joe Staley OT: 1st round, 28 overall
David Bass OG/C: 2nd round, 33 overall
Adam Snyder OG/OT: 3rd round, 94 overall

BlindSite
05-04-2008, 08:25 PM
I liked the Rachal selection.

d34ng3l021
05-04-2008, 08:27 PM
Same here. He looks to be damn good.

BlindSite
05-04-2008, 08:59 PM
I didn't mind the blalock pick for you guys either, in the games I saw he didn't exactly excel against the panthers. Hows he working out so far?

BamaFalcon59
05-04-2008, 09:01 PM
I didn't mind the blalock pick for you guys either, in the games I saw he didn't exactly excel against the panthers. Hows he working out so far?

He was not very good last year. But he should develop, it is unlikely that an athletic road grader like him busts at guard.

d34ng3l021
05-04-2008, 09:06 PM
Low chance of busting, yes. I am not too worried about him.

Its really hard to say which team has the most potential though. Every team can make a case for being good in the future. I do think however, we can try to figure out the window for a championship for most teams.

I dont want to do it for all teams, but it is obvious the Chiefs and Falcons and Dolphins will not be competing anytime soon, but with the way their rebuilding process is going, they look to be very good in 3-4 years. Teams that probably will not be as good in 3-4 years might be teams that are 'selling their soul' for guys to come in and help immediately so they can build up for a championship run.