Value of positions in football?
 

This has been bugging me for a while, so I would really like an answer.

Which position in football is the most important to get a star player or at least a decent one? Which positions have the biggest difference between the best players and the worst?

Anyone have any idea or some good links?

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
This has been bugging me for a while, so I would really like an answer.

Which position in football is the most important to get a star player or at least a decent one? Which positions have the biggest difference between the best players and the worst?

Anyone have any idea or some good links?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. LT.
2. Probably QB.

Football is such a team sport to an extreme that it's really hard to judge these things, esp. the second question.

omfg mcnabb you idiot

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

I'd say you don't necessarily have to have a stellar quarterback, RB, or receivers, though your quarterback had better be able to manage the game, and they must work well as a unit avoid turnovers, and do things like pick-up blitzes.

I'd say without fail you need at least one stud LB, a decent cover corner, and at least one defensive lineman who commands double-teams.

As far as disparity between best and worst, I say CB. You can count the # of pure shutdown cornerbacks in the league on one hand. And there are others who are dead meat if you get them on an island against a Moss or a TO.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

1. Quarterback
2. RB, WR, CB, K
3. LT, C, DE
4. DT, G, RT, MLB, TE
5. OLB, FS, SS, FB, P

The QB is by far the most important, and if you don't think that's true, you're crazy. He is involved in more plays than anyone else, he has the ball more than anyone else, and his mistakes kill the team more than anyone else's.

Other skill positions are very important. You can't have an offense without skill players, and you can't have a defense if you can't defend the pass. For all the BS about running the football, the truth is that the majority of NFL plays are pass plays and the majority of yards come from passing. You need WRs and CBs.

Along the lines, the most important postions are left tackle, center and defensive end. The left tackle protects the QB's blindside, and generally goes against the other team's best DE. When you think about the league's best pass rushers, most play LDE. Strahan is an exception. The center is very undervalued by the public, but extremely important, because it's the center's job to call blocking assignments at the line. If your center can't read the defense, your QB gets killed. Center is also important for the obvious reason that he has to snap the football. Defensive ends are your primary pass rushers, and a good pass rush is the most lethal thing a defense can have.

From there it gets pretty hazy. Lineman in general are undervalued by the public, and linebackers are generally overvalued. Linebackers make more tackles than defensive tackles do, but that doesn't make them more important. Running plays are generally decided by who wins at the point of attack; if a linebacker runs down the RB seven yards down the field on a run off-tackle, the LB made a good play but the offensive still won the play, and it's probably because the OT, TE and/or FB won at the point of attack. Of the linebackers, MLB are the most important, so I put them in the 4th category.

Safety is a goofy position. A good safety can have a tremendous effect on a defense; look how much Brian Dawkins has done for the Eagles over the years, or what Roy Williams did tonight. Safeties also cover the TE in many defensive sets. However, you can get by with passable, average safeties. Ditto for outside linebackers. Fullbacks just aren't very important any more, and for the most part aren't used much. There are very few stud fullbacks left in the league such as Lorenzo Neal (Chargers). But next time you watch the Chargers play, don't watch LT, just watch Neal lead block for him. A lot of LT's success comes from Neal.

The hardest position to quantify is TE, because TE is such a hybrid position. A good reciving TE can be considered an extra WR, and is just as important when he is running routes. On the flip side, TEs are not as good as actual lineman when it comes to blocking. A guy like Gates could be considered a WR and put in category two.

Kickers are massively important, not just for FG but for kickoffs and field position.

Punters are less important. A good punter can help a lot, but the skill variance for punters in the NFL is pretty low. With the exception of a couple guys, they're mostly the same, and it's hard to quantify because there aren't really any good statistics for punters besides touchbacks vs. inside 20 ratio.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

I don't really agree with your defensive rankings because different teams utilize different schemes which emphasize certain positions over others.

Also, given the no touching rule of a few years ago the value of CBs dropped and the value of safeties went up.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

I mean, it's obviously a pretty difficult question to answer, and of course it's going to depend on the team and scheme.

It's a chicken vs. egg type of thing. The chargers are going to utilize the TE a lot in their passing scheme because of Gates. But which came first, Gates, or the scheme? How much of Gates' success is based on their scheme? Personally, I can't answer that, because I don't follow the Chargers closely. But the point is that these rankings are going to vary a lot based on the team.

The Eagles, for example, are my favorite team and I follow them very closely. For them, the QB is extra important because they pass so much. The FS is very important because it's Dawkins and he is all over the place doing a myriad of things. The OLB are less important, because their safeties often cover the TE. Their TE is important because they throw to the TE a lot, their WR are less important because they throw to the TE/RB a lot. Their CB are super important because of their blitz schemes.

It's going to vary a lot. I think I did a pretty good job for an overall outline.

And to put it bluntly, your suggestion about corners and safeties is just way off base. Corners can move to safety as they get older and slower, the opposite never happens. Corners are faster and more athletic, they are more responsible for the recievers, and they are more important. Also, look at how many corners go in the first round of the draft. Now look at how many safeties do. I'll help you out. In the 2005 NFL draft, five corners went in the first round against one safety. Corner is by far the more important position.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

punter who can do kickoffs > kicker

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

I think a running back with the ability to catch the ball out of the backfield, block and run is incredibly underrated. A back with those skills can vastly help out a quarterback. There aren't many great QBs in the league. And with 32 starting QBs that leaves a lot of subpar guys leading teams. A guy like Lamont Jordan has the ability to make his QB look a heck of a lot better because he's running short routes, dump offs and screens where there is little danger, in many cases, of interceptions or incomplete passes.

Also, a good TE for the same reasons.

I think WR are overrated. A great WR will not make a QB great. but a great QB can make a WR look great.

Therefore, of the offensive skill positions I'll say
RB
QB
TE
WR

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
This has been bugging me for a while, so I would really like an answer.

Which position in football is the most important to get a star player or at least a decent one? Which positions have the biggest difference between the best players and the worst?

Anyone have any idea or some good links?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if you look at how much each position gets paid (in the NFL) that would give you a good idea of their relative value. I think it goes something like
1 QB
2 OL
3 RB
4 DL
5 LB
6 Secondary
7 wide receiver

This list is mostly a guess, and I have no idea where kickers/punters go.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

RB, WR, and K are entirely way too high. RB and K are especially interchangeable with other players in that position. LT and QB are 1 and 1a.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

After thinking about it some more, I think K is probably in group 3 (not 2) and LT in group 2 (not 3).

I disagree with your opinion on RB and WR.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

QB is far ahead of the rest in the NFL. RB is far ahead in High school. College is somewhere between these two.

The other positions are much closer and depend a great deal on the scheme and the particular opposition. A particular individual player can also be so great that he increases the importance of his position. Barry Sanders, Moss, Dion Sanders, LT are all examples of this.

Also, centers are probably the least important of the OL, blind side tackle is easily the most. For college running teams, gaurds are very important.

Safetys are probably more important than corners in college, but not in the NFL.

Defensive ends and devensive tackles are too close to call.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
QB is far ahead of the rest in the NFL. RB is far ahead in High school. College is somewhere between these two.

The other positions are much closer and depend a great deal on the scheme and the particular opposition. A particular individual player can also be so great that he increases the importance of his position. Barry Sanders, Moss, Dion Sanders, LT are all examples of this.

Also, centers are probably the least important of the OL, blind side tackle is easily the most. For college running teams, gaurds are very important.

Safetys are probably more important than corners in college, but not in the NFL.

Defensive ends and devensive tackles are too close to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

DTs get hurt too much to really be in groups 1 or 2.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This has been bugging me for a while, so I would really like an answer.

Which position in football is the most important to get a star player or at least a decent one? Which positions have the biggest difference between the best players and the worst?

Anyone have any idea or some good links?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if you look at how much each position gets paid (in the NFL) that would give you a good idea of their relative value. I think it goes something like
1 QB
2 OL
3 RB
4 DL
5 LB
6 Secondary
7 wide receiver

This list is mostly a guess, and I have no idea where kickers/punters go.

[/ QUOTE ]

remember that OL is five positions, not 1.

as stated above, QB is most important, and I hate this phrase, but it's really not close. maybe not as important as a pitcher in baseball, but pretty close. the only teams that can win without a good QB need a great running game - which involves a set of offense lineman and a RB or/and a great defense - which is obviously 11 guys, a few of whom are probably standouts.

it also depends on level of play. in high school, a lightning fast/tough RB can carry a team to victories, and a monster linebacker can terrorize an offense. this isn't nearly as true in the NFL.

I really have a hard time saying what position is #2. I would probably say a 3 down linebacker, a guy like Ray Lewis (4 years ago) or Tedy Bruschi

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
QB is far ahead of the rest in the NFL. RB is far ahead in High school. College is somewhere between these two.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is an extremely important point. The level of football being played matters. A mediocre high school team with a top 10 running back can bring his team to the state championship. Period. However, there's such a proliferation of good halfbacks in the NFL that their value drops drastically from college and high school.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This has been bugging me for a while, so I would really like an answer.

Which position in football is the most important to get a star player or at least a decent one? Which positions have the biggest difference between the best players and the worst?

Anyone have any idea or some good links?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if you look at how much each position gets paid (in the NFL) that would give you a good idea of their relative value. I think it goes something like
1 QB
2 OL
3 RB
4 DL
5 LB
6 Secondary
7 wide receiver

This list is mostly a guess, and I have no idea where kickers/punters go.

[/ QUOTE ]

remember that OL is five positions, not 1.

as stated above, QB is most important, and I hate this phrase, but it's really not close. maybe not as important as a pitcher in baseball, but pretty close. the only teams that can win without a good QB need a great running game - which involves a set of offense lineman and a RB or/and a great defense - which is obviously 11 guys, a few of whom are probably standouts.

it also depends on level of play. in high school, a lightning fast/tough RB can carry a team to victories, and a monster linebacker can terrorize an offense. this isn't nearly as true in the NFL.

I really have a hard time saying what position is #2. I would probably say a 3 down linebacker, a guy like Ray Lewis (4 years ago) or Tedy Bruschi

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if you want me to break down the OL,
1 LT
2 C
3 the rest of the line is about the same

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
And to put it bluntly, your suggestion about corners and safeties is just way off base. Corners can move to safety as they get older and slower, the opposite never happens. Corners are faster and more athletic, they are more responsible for the recievers, and they are more important. Also, look at how many corners go in the first round of the draft. Now look at how many safeties do. I'll help you out. In the 2005 NFL draft, five corners went in the first round against one safety. Corner is by far the more important position.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, maybe there weren't any first round safeties? I have a lot to say to this, but I don't have the time now. But your draft argument proves nothing. Your chicken and egg argument, however, is quite good.

I think, being a Philly fan, you'll certainly understand my point about schemes and such with how they handled the Corey Simon situation. To them, in their scheme, he wasn't as important a piece to justify paying him what he wanted/deserved/whatever. But guys like Gates, sure, when you get one, you change the scheme.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

My Q was mostly NFL-based, though I'd love to hear opinions on HS Football or College Football.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

So, I'm thinking it's
1. LT + QB
2. DE + CB
3. DT + rest of OL
4. WR + LB + RB
5. S + TE + P/K

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

I think when looking at this you need to determine which players are the most independent. I.e. you can have a horrible running back behind an amazing oline and he can be all pro. Although I think oline and dline are very important especially a left tackle the lines are veyr much units so one guy cannot make an o or dline which eliminates them. Although kickers and punters are very independent they don't count because they are not real football players. No matter how good WR's are they need a qb so they're gone. This leaves me with LB's CB's, safeties and QB's. I think a weak LB can be hidden a lot easier than weak defensive backs because they can burnt on huge plays.Although safeties are very important it's a very deep position because a lot of guys can play it(undersized backers, oversized corners) This means my top two positions are qb because he pretty much controls everything and CB. This is because corners are often in man and it is a one on one matchup where if they fail or succeed it is completely dependent on how well they play. I think the big difference between these two and the other positions is that you cannot have huge holes at cb and or qb and win superbowls.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

The only problem with your reasoning when it comes to CBs is that it fails to take into account the the interdependance of the different components that make up a defense. You are right, that if a team has a weak dline and weak linebackers, then it is gonna need amazing corners. Alternatively though, if a team has weak corners, it can be made up for by defensive ends that can put more pressure on the QB or on lineman and line backers that can stop the run alowing the safteys to help in pass coverage and so on...

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
punter who can do kickoffs > kicker

[/ QUOTE ]

spoken like someone who had been watching Paul Edinger kick off in recent years.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

Here is an argument for RB: The Broncos.

Plug in any RB off the street, you get a 1,200 yard runner and a playoff team.

Plug in Terrell Davis, you get 2,000 yards and 2 superbowls.

And the talk about how a WR needs a quarterback, please. Look at how much better the Eagles' offense was with a healthy TO. A good WR makes a QB/offense look better than the other way around.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here is an argument for RB: The Broncos.

Plug in any RB off the street, you get a 1,200 yard runner and a playoff team.

Plug in Terrell Davis, you get 2,000 yards and 2 superbowls.



[/ QUOTE ]

errm, there is one pretty big difference between the Super Bowl Broncos teams and the teams since.

the Broncos are actually a clear example of how unimportant RB can be. their 5 o lineman/schemes have been so good that the RB hasn't mattered that much.

[ QUOTE ]
And the talk about how a WR needs a quarterback, please. Look at how much better the Eagles' offense was with a healthy TO. A good WR makes a QB/offense look better than the other way around.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you honestly think that a WR is most important than a QB, then you're crazy.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
the Broncos are actually a clear example of how unimportant RB can be. their 5 o lineman/schemes have been so good that the RB hasn't mattered that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

You missed my point. They change RB so often that you can guage what effect a good RB has by being in their system.

By putting T.Davis into their system, you squeezed an extra 800 yards out of their o-line.

Bad RB: 1000-1200 yards (Anderson, Gary)
Passable RB: 1500 yards (Portis)
Good RB: 2000 yards (Davis)

It's hard to know what % of a RB's yards is the RB, and what % is the o-line. Is Shaun Alexander good because he's good, or because Walter Jones is good? Of course it's both, but it's hard to know what the breakdown is.

With TD, you can see exactly what the breakdown is. TD is worth an extra 500 yards over Clinton Portis, a guy who is considered a top echelon RB (but really isn't).

[ QUOTE ]
if you honestly think that a WR is most important than a QB, then you're crazy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course I don't. I've already posted exactly what I feel the rankings are. I'm not sure how you got this idea.

I'm simply saying that WR, like the other skill positions (RB, CB) are crucial to a team's success.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the Broncos are actually a clear example of how unimportant RB can be. their 5 o lineman/schemes have been so good that the RB hasn't mattered that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

You missed my point. They change RB so often that you can guage what effect a good RB has by being in their system.

By putting T.Davis into their system, you squeezed an extra 800 yards out of their o-line.

Bad RB: 1000-1200 yards (Anderson, Gary)
Passable RB: 1500 yards (Portis)
Good RB: 2000 yards (Davis)

It's hard to know what % of a RB's yards is the RB, and what % is the o-line. Is Shaun Alexander good because he's good, or because Walter Jones is good? Of course it's both, but it's hard to know what the breakdown is.

With TD, you can see exactly what the breakdown is. TD is worth an extra 500 yards over Clinton Portis, a guy who is considered a top echelon RB (but really isn't).

[ QUOTE ]
if you honestly think that a WR is most important than a QB, then you're crazy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course I don't. I've already posted exactly what I feel the rankings are. I'm not sure how you got this idea.

I'm simply saying that WR, like the other skill positions (RB, CB) are crucial to a team's success.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was referring to John Elway playing in TD's heyday, and not playing after. they basically retired the same season, which was a big factor in TD's success (having a historically great QB behind him).

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

1) QB
2) Stud Pass rusher (DE or OLB in the 3-4)
3) LT
4) RB
5) Stud TE (think Gates or Tony G in prime) Otherwise TE goes way down if they aren't a stud. Look at the points SD and KC can put up w/ the passing game w/out good WR's

Defensive positions can rank all over the place depending on the scheme you want to run. But EVERY defense needs a way to rush the passer. And being able to rush the passer w/ 4 guys is a HUGE advantage to any defense

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

Um, if you give Clinton Portis 392 carries in either 2003 or 2002, I'm sure you'll get him 2008 yards.

As it is, Clinton Portis's 2002 and 2003 were higher rushing averages than TD's 2008 yard season.

Oh, Mike Anderson also rushed for roughly 1500 yards.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was referring to John Elway playing in TD's heyday, and not playing after. they basically retired the same season, which was a big factor in TD's success (having a historically great QB behind him).

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew what you were getting at.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

funny, I place my prop bets (for the most part) based on returning/departing offensive and defensive linemen.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Um, if you give Clinton Portis 392 carries in either 2003 or 2002, I'm sure you'll get him 2008 yards.

As it is, Clinton Portis's 2002 and 2003 were higher rushing averages than TD's 2008 yard season.

Oh, Mike Anderson also rushed for roughly 1500 yards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought I remembered Anderson rushing for 1,200 yards and Gary for a little over a 1,000. I didn't check, so you got me.

I wish better statistics were avaliable to compare. IIRC, footballoutsider statistics for individual players don't go back that far.

Re: Value of positions in football?
 

Anderson 2000: 1487 yds in 297 carries
Gary 1999: 1159 yds in 276 carries