Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

Interesting list here. Along the lines of power rankings, it's tough measure anything that has yet to happen (the '09 season), but it's a list that should merit some discussion, if nothing else.

Redskins notables:

[B]71. London Fletcher, LB, Washington Redskins:[/B] It's a crime against humanity that London Fletcher — one of the best linebackers of the past decade — has never, not once, been elected to a Pro Bowl. Fletcher is the NFL's Mr. Consistency. He hasn't missed a single game in his 10-year NFL career and has recorded over 120 tackles in every season since 2002. Get him to Hawaii ... or wherever the Pro Bowl is next year.

[B]45. Clinton Portis, RB, Washington Redskins:[/B] Portis was on his way to what looked like a potential MVP season six weeks into the '08 campaign, only to finish the year with a few less than impressive performances. Portis should be refreshed and good to go for the start of '09. He's one of the top-10 running backs in the league and has been for close to a decade.

[B]14. Albert Haynesworth, DT, Washington Redskins:[/B] The $100 million man. After signing the biggest deal for a defensive tackle in NFL history, Haynesworth has a giant target on his back. Having never stayed healthy for a complete NFL season, there are critics out there. He had better perform. He should.

[url]http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9665338/NFL%27s-top-99-player-rankings-for-%2709[/url]

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

This seems a bit off. How is Cooley not in the top 99? The same can be said with Moss. Not a single DB in ouur secondary made the list? (Hall, Rogers Landry). 3 more Redskins at the most should be on this list.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

If 3 players from every team were on the list, that would make 96 slots taken up. You think the Skins should have twice the average allotment?

What on-field basis is there for that?

If the Skins had six on the list, how many players from the Steelers and the Patriots and the Colts should be on the list? Twelve each? Fifteen each?

After all, those teams have a huge edge in on-field accomplishments.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

I agree with getting only 3 players on the list:

Landry is good but he has a ways to go to be considered anywhere close to Sean Taylor.

Hall and Cooley both had down years last season.

Rodgers is just coming into his own as a player.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

[quote=WaldSkins;562764]I agree with getting only 3 players on the list:

Landry is good but he has a ways to go to be considered anywhere close to Sean Taylor.

Hall and Cooley both had down years last season.

Rodgers is just coming into his own as a player.[/quote]

What does Aaron Rodgers have to do with this discussion?

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

[quote=Ruhskins;562773]What does Aaron [B]Rodgers[/B] have to do with this discussion?[/quote]

Rogers:goodjob:

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

I'm not sure if i agree Hall had a down year. For that many pics for so few games, i'd call that good production

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

[quote=WaldSkins;562764]I agree with getting only 3 players on the list:

Landry is good but he has a ways to go to be considered anywhere close to Sean Taylor.

Hall and Cooley both had down years last season.

Rodgers is just coming into his own as a player.[/quote]

I wouldn't really say Cooley had a down year. He had career highs in catches and yards, plus his run blocking was better than ever. I know he only scored once, but I think that was more of a function of the poor offense than his game.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

[quote=GMScud;562789]I wouldn't really say Cooley had a down year. He had career highs in catches and yards, plus his run blocking was better than ever. I know he only scored once, but I think that was more of a function of the poor offense than his game.[/quote]

I agree. I think his TD numbers will be better this year just like the rest of the offense will be better.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

[quote=stu_nna;562787]I'm not sure if i agree Hall had a down year. For that many pics for so few games, i'd call that good production[/quote]

What about the first half of the season when he was with the Raiders?

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

[quote=vallin21;562721]This seems a bit off. How is Cooley not in the top 99? The same can be said with Moss. Not a single DB in ouur secondary made the list? (Hall, Rogers Landry). 3 more Redskins at the most should be on this list.[/quote]Inclusively, I thought Schrager's list did it's due dilligence. Outside of a baffling choice here or there (Reggie Bush, Matt Cassel) his 99 would have been as good as anyone's 99.

As a Skins fan, I think Rogers probably should have been somewhere on his list. As for Cooley, he's a lot better than Bush, but an exception doesn't exactly prove the rule. Coooley would probably miss on most lists, although you could say he should be between 90-100. Same deal with Samuels. Great players who are right in that borderline range.

I agree with him that the only two Redskins who should be on EVERY top 100 list are Haynesworth and Portis. He even went out of his way to point out that Fletch is terribly underrated.

Now, his top 20...that could use some work. A lot of work.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

Haynesworth could be higher. Cooley should definitely be in there somewhere.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

A KR in devin hester wouldnt make my top 99.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

Only 3 TEs made the list, and Jason Witten barely made the list. I can understand him putting Witten, Gates, and Gonzalez ahead of Cooley based on stats from last year, mostly due to TDs. I think he just didn't value TEs much for his list.

Re: Peter Schrager's (Fox Sports) Top 99 for 2009
 

[quote=an23dy;563163]Only 3 TEs made the list, and Jason Witten barely made the list. I can understand him putting Witten, Gates, and Gonzalez ahead of Cooley based on stats from last year, mostly due to TDs. I think he just didn't value TEs much for his list.[/quote]

There are also very few TEs in the league that are real difference makers. Witten, Gates, Gonzalez, Dallas Clark, Cooley, maybe Owen Daniels and Kellen Winslow. Outside of that, it's slim pickings.