PDA

View Full Version : 2010 Organizational Rankings--Texans #1


HoustonFrog
07-16-2010, 02:22 PM
This is based on under-25 talent. This is from ESPN Insider. The Texans, Chiefs and Panthers are at the top. Basically they took all teams and looked at guys who will be under 25 as of Sept 1. Then they rate that talent. Kind of a way to look at guys at the back of your roster, etc.

Playing Devil's Advocate here it is pretty subjective. They say Mario is the best young player at his position...debatable, depending on what season you discuss. It throws Amobi in there as inconsistent but still 23. It mentions Barwin, etc. Reading the list of the other teams, I'm not really sure what they evaluated it all on.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/insider/news/story?page=FootballOutsiders2010OrganizationalRank ings

Goldensilence
07-16-2010, 02:28 PM
This is based on under-25 talent. This is from ESPN Insider. The Texans, Chiefs and Panthers are at the top. Basically they took all teams and looked at guys who will be under 25 as of Sept 1. Then they rate that talent. Kind of a way to look at guys at the back of your roster, etc.

Playing Devil's Advocate here it is pretty subjective. They say Mario is the best young player at his position...debatable, depending on what season you discuss. It throws Amobi in there as inconsistent but still 23. It mentions Barwin, etc. Reading the list of the other teams, I'm not really sure what they evaluated it all on.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/insider/news/story?page=FootballOutsiders2010OrganizationalRank ings

Strange way to base a ranking for teams. I will admit the Texas have a lot of young guys with upside, just will have to see how quickly the team matures.

ChampionTexan
07-16-2010, 02:37 PM
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73405

badboy
07-16-2010, 02:37 PM
I'd rather review a total team roster or starters rather than this type of break down. Since it is not just the "young guys"playing it does not help much. Ok, we have a good group of young players.

HoustonFrog
07-16-2010, 02:40 PM
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73405

Thanks, I hadn't seen it and its on the ESPN mainpage now.

I'd rather review a total team roster or starters rather than this type of break down. Since it is not just the "young guys"playing it does not help much. Ok, we have a good group of young players.

Why I don't like about the article is that it really is just a crap shoot on what they say, depending on the team. The Texans have alot of guys under 25. They can say Slaton is an up and comer and Okoye is only 23. Then they will say Felix Jones has been injured alot for Dallas and that LeRon Landry is a complete flop for Washington. Slaton has been hurt and had a bad year and Okoye has been a flop. It just seems like on each team they kind of labeled guys and the teams with alot of young players came through at the top. Though the Texans have more talent than the Panthers and Chiefs.

GP
07-16-2010, 04:31 PM
This means we're going to win the Super Bowl.

This is right up there with the other thing that I detest: Power Rankings.

The people who created that article are nothing more than a bunch of people sitting around and fantasizing about a meaningless topic.

Not bashing the person who started the thread, because I was going to start the thread had it not already began. I'm just saying that this sort of stuff is hogwash.

What's next? A system to calculate the best team logo? We need a ranking on that, too.

Second Honeymoon
07-16-2010, 04:35 PM
hopefully all the potential and talent will translate into wins. myself, i think veterans are important in this league, specifically veterans who are leaders and have won before.

the team is more than a little flat at times. the team needs to learn to finish and chances are Gary isn't going to impart that to them if he hasn't done it after four years. i think a little veteran leadership and heart could have gone a long way to compensate for some of our deficiencies. they are going with all youth and hopefully it works out.

if it doesn't, we may have to tweak our philosophy and be more aggressive to add from the outside and even guys that are veterans. nothing wrong with a veteran at all. you need them.

Hookem Horns
07-16-2010, 08:26 PM
I would hope that Texas would have a lot of under-25 talent. There aren't many over 25 year olds playing in college. ;)

JB
07-16-2010, 08:39 PM
I would hope that Texas would have a lot of under-25 talent. There aren't many over 25 year olds playing in college. ;)

Wow! Can't believe none of us caught that!

Rep to you good sir!

ArlingtonTexan
07-16-2010, 08:43 PM
Wow! Can't believe none of us caught that!

Rep to you good sir!

Yep. Missed it, but fixed it :tiphat:

Hookem Horns
07-16-2010, 10:19 PM
Strange way to base a ranking for teams. I will admit the Texas have a lot of young guys with upside, just will have to see how quickly the team matures.

LOL, Goldensilence not only didn't catch it, he reenforced it. ;)

V3rm0nt3r
07-18-2010, 01:19 PM
What's next? A system to calculate the best team logo? We need a ranking on that, too.

Panthers. It takes balls to make sky blue you're primary color.

thunderkyss
07-18-2010, 05:09 PM
the team needs to learn to finish and chances are Gary isn't going to impart that to them if he hasn't done it after four years.

How many guys who will most likely start for us in 2010 have been on this team for 4 years?

I think we'll see our core of 4 year players emerge in 2010. These are the guys who have been with GK for the last 4 years.

Schaub, AJ, Winston, Walter, Mario, Demeco, OD, Brisiel, Leach, White, Anderson

Guys going into their 4th year:

Amobi, Jacoby, Studdard, Bullman,

Going into year 3

Reeves, Wilson, Barber, Myers, Brown, Molden, Okam, Del Juan, Slaton

Not all those guys are even starters. I just had to throw up some more names.

I know no one wants to hear it, but you've got to kick out that first year. Kubiak's 4 years, IMO started in 2007, and I think he's been doing a mighty fine job.

Lucky
07-18-2010, 05:50 PM
I know no one wants to hear it, but you've got to kick out that first year. Kubiak's 4 years, IMO started in 2007, and I think he's been doing a mighty fine job.
I don't think this should turn into a Kubiak thread. But, a "mighty fine job" should have produced a playoff season, or two. I think it's more fair to say that Kubiak has done just enough to keep his job.

nut
07-19-2010, 05:46 PM
This is a link to a forum which has a story from ESPN insider (? I think). It's an article ranking teams' talent under the age of 25. Anyway, alot of you might like it.

http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=783777

JB
07-19-2010, 05:49 PM
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73459&highlight=young+talent

Goldensilence
07-19-2010, 06:00 PM
LOL, Goldensilence not only didn't catch it, he reenforced it. ;)

See...now you're just sending subliminal messages. Pretty soon Gary Kubiak might even renounce his maroon pedigree.

drs23
07-19-2010, 11:41 PM
This means we're going to win the Super Bowl.

This is right up there with the other thing that I detest: Power Rankings.

The people who created that article are nothing more than a bunch of people sitting around and fantasizing about a meaningless topic.

Not bashing the person who started the thread, because I was going to start the thread had it not already began. I'm just saying that this sort of stuff is hogwash.

What's next? A system to calculate the best team logo? We need a ranking on that, too?

YES WE DO. Texans are #1. It's ironically the youngest team logo. :kitten:

badboy
07-20-2010, 12:34 PM
YES WE DO. Texans are #1. It's ironically the youngest team logo. :kitten:
That's a lot of bull!

TexCanada
07-20-2010, 08:53 PM
This means we're going to win the Super Bowl.

This is right up there with the other thing that I detest: Power Rankings.

The people who created that article are nothing more than a bunch of people sitting around and fantasizing about a meaningless topic.

Not bashing the person who started the thread, because I was going to start the thread had it not already began. I'm just saying that this sort of stuff is hogwash.

What's next? A system to calculate the best team logo? We need a ranking on that, too.

To be fair though, this "hogwash" is what gets us through the off-season. We argue about meaningless stuff like this all the time!