Four-Pronged Rankings

[SouthSoundHawk]

Every time anyone posts something from this pile I know it's going to be malarkey.


There should be a special forum for articles that are simply too ridiculous to count as worthwhile news...then...name it after this jabroni.


Also, the Cowboys are going to do what they do every season...STB. I hate that they get covered so heavily...they're useless and irrelevant.

 

[BlueTalon]

Seeing as the Cowboys come out ranked number two, I would say it is a pretty bad way to rank teams.

Moving on, aye carumba! That can't be a serious result. What a flawed system. I was going to click on the link but why waste my time.

That is often the most brilliant of decisions.

 

[Hawknballs]

Seeing as the Cowboys come out ranked number two, I would say it is a pretty bad way to rank teams.

Moving on, aye carumba! That can't be a serious result. What a flawed system. I was going to click on the link but why waste my time.

That is often the most brilliant of decisions.

unfortunately my curiosity got the best of me and I finally broke down and looked.

This is probably the most retarded ranking system I've ever seen, and that includes several misguided and unfortunate ventures to bleacher report prior to them becoming a cnn affiliate and actually having to start screening and editing their writers.

For starters, Pete Prickso has no right to rank QB's because if there's something he's consistently wrong about it's QB's. If there is one position on the field that he shouldn't be evaluating, it's QB's.

Next up. Okung is one of the best left tackles in the game and he's listed people above him who are not that great.

Pass Rush and CB - you can't just pick one guy off of each team and base it on that. But Pete Prickso does a great job of doing the bare minimum to earn his paycheck, which is sadly probably more than mine even though I actually have an obligation to not make a mockery of my position and for whatever weird reason have enough self respect to not half-ass it all the time.

 

[HawkGA]

I know some are knocking the idea, but I think the idea is decent. It is the off-season after all so it's not like we don't need things to fill the void. I think his problem comes in how he ranks people. I'm assuming he still had a little bit of Romo dribbling down his chin when he started to rank the QBs.

 

[Hawknballs]

the problem is ranking 4 players on a team of 22 starters and using that as a basis for who the best teams are is retarded.

 

[Cartire]

I know some are knocking the idea, but I think the idea is decent. It is the off-season after all so it's not like we don't need things to fill the void. I think his problem comes in how he ranks people. I'm assuming he still had a little bit of Romo dribbling down his chin when he started to rank the QBs.

Im all for off-season tom foolery. But I think if were going to allow this kinda crap, then this crap needs to be open to ridicule when it fails.

The idea is not decent at all. The only consistent factor is the QB (and his rankings are crap) in the formula. After that, he bases a teams ability to cover, protect and pass rush on a single person. Everyone knows that cant be done. Because you can have a juilus peppers or a demarcus ware, but if hes the only good pass rush on your line, your pass rush is going to be crap. You can have a Patrick Peterson (who i think is overrated), but if the rest of the secondary is subpar, your going to give up tons of passing yards. You can have a great LT, but if the LG is crap, good Pass rushes will easily take advantage of that.

So no, this formula is complete garbage, and while it is just subjective off-season banter, it should still be op to ridicule. You dont get a free pass for crap just cause its not during the season.

 

[Hawknballs]

tony romo threw more INT's last year than Kaepernick, Wilson, and RG3 combined.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

Dude needs more prongs. A lot more prongs.