Gonzo Reads Magazines: Yahoo! Sports/Pro Football Weekly 2009 NFL Preview Issue
by Christopher Gates on Jun 2, 2009 5:55 PM CDT
in Minnesota Vikings
Email
Print
You know, every year I say that these magazines keep coming out earlier and earlier, and every year people laugh. Well, it's the second day of June, and I'm already sitting here holding the first NFL Preview magazine of the year in my hands.
Seriously, this is getting out of control.
In any event, this preview issue is brought to you by Yahoo! Sports and Pro Football Weekly. I'm sure that many of the covers will have players specific to a particular part of the country. Here in Mississippi, however, the version the local Books-a-Million was carrying has Steven Jackson of the St. Louis Rams, Kansas City Chiefs' WR Dwayne Bowe, and Indianapolis QB Peyton Manning on the cover. Ah, well, in order to get one's football fix, one has to be prepared to sacrifice such niceties, I guess.
So what do Yahoo! and PFW think of the Vikings' chances for 2009? Well, let's take a closer look.
The magazine shows the NFC North as being a log jam this year, with the Bears and Vikings both predicted to finish with identical 9-7 records, the Packers projected to finish 8-8, and the Lions bringing up the read with a 3-13 mark. For reasons I'm not entirely sure of, they've given the Bears the nod for the division title over the Beloved Purple. Yeah, I don't understand it, either.
The folks at Yahoo! and PFW have ranked the teams with a letter grade at all the major positions. Let's take a look at how the teams stack up when compared to one another. Here they are in predicted order of finish:
| QB | RB | WR | OL | DL | LB | DB | ST | |
| Chicago (9-7) | A- | B | C | B- | B- | B | C | A |
| Minnesota (9-7) | D+ | A+ | B- | B | A | B | B- | C |
| Green Bay (8-8) | B | B- | A- | C+ | C | B | A- | B- |
| Detroit (3-13) | C+ | C | C | D | D+ | C | C- | B- |
Well, that's certainly a bit curious. The Vikings grade out higher than the Bears at six of the eight rated positions. . .yet Yahoo! and PFW say the Bears are going to win the NFC North. They really must put a lot of stock in Jay Cutler's ability. . .which is also a bit curious, considering how pathetic he and the Denver Broncos looked down the stretch in 2008. Oh, and in the "tell us something we didn't already know" department, the Vikings have the best running backs, offensive line, and defensive line in the NFC North. Shocking.
This particular magazine also ranks players by position, as well as a Top 50 overall players in the NFL ranking. The Vikings have three players in the overall Top 50, according to this list, and they're all found in the upper half of the list. Running back Adrian Peterson comes in at #7, DE Jared Allen is just behind at #9, and DT Kevin Williams checks in at #17. As far as the position-by-position rankings, here's how the Vikings fared:
QB - Sage Rosenfels #25
RB - Adrian Peterson #1, Chester Taylor #28
TE - Visanthe Shiancoe #14
WR - None listed. (Amazing little note. . .Devin Hester merits a mention on the list as a "Top Veteran Prospect." Bernard Berrian, who is a better receiver than Hester in every measurable and meaningful way? Not mentioned at all. Seriously. I'm not kidding.)
C - None listed. (Matt Birk came in at #10.)
G - Steve Hutchinson #1
OT - Bryant McKinnie #12
DE - Jared Allen #1
DT - Kevin Williams #2, Pat Williams #9
ILB - E.J. Henderson #22 (you'll have a hard time convincing me that there are 21 ILBs in the NFL that are better than #56, but hey. . .there it is.)
OLB - Chad Greenway #9 (with exactly the same "grade" of 3.75 as Lance Briggs, who inexplicably gets way more ink than Greenway does).
CB - Antoine Winfield #8, Cedric Griffin mentioned as a "Top Veteran Prospect"
S - Madieu Williams #18
Also not surprisingly, Adrian Peterson is the consensus #1 pick in any fantasy football draft. Again, the word "duh" comes to mind.
So there you have it. . .the first NFL preview issue of the year is out there even more obscenely early than the ones that came out first last season. What do you think of what the folks at Yahoo! and PFW have put out there?
42 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I know it's pointless to nitpick about these types of things...
but come on. A D+ in QB? That’s just mean. I mean, I know we’re not too hot there, but we’re not that bad. Couldn’t they have given us a C-? It’s basically the same thing, but not quite as degrading.
And EJ is #22? Going to have to call BS on that one.
In AP I trust
Just say no to Favre.
by FarvaForTheVikings on Jun 2, 2009 7:00 PM CDT reply actions
+1
At worst the Vikes are a C at the QB position. We bitch and moan about the QBs because we want a true, top-tier franchise-quality gunslinger, but what we have is at the very least, middle of the road. And quite possibly better.
As for EJ, they’re probably looking at his stats on the year, which are way off because of his injury. Doesn’t excuse them from being so lazy as to fail to find someone who’ll take the time to really look at the situation, but then, this is how Vegas betting lines are born :)
Vikings passing stats for last season
YPG – 25th
QB Rating – 18th
YPA – 15th
TDs – 11th
Those rankings average out to be about 17th in the league. Not great, yet still middle of the pack. If a C is average (15th) then the Vikings should have a C-.
They weren’t too far off on their assessment, but I like that C- waaaaaaay better than the D+! Not to mention most of last season was with Gus, and I think we can all agree that Sage is a slightly better QB than Gus. So the Vikings have only improved their QB position this season.
by PurplePeopleEaters09 on Jun 3, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Better than Last Year
The Vikes haven’t lost anyone substantial other than Matty Birk and Sharper, and Sharper was at the point where he was doing more harm than good. With good replacements for both waiting in the wings, the addition of Sage, and the upgrades from the draft (Harvin, Loadholdt, and Allen), I think it’s fair to say that the team is better than it was last year. And last year’s schedule was a LOT harder than this years.
Last year the Vikes were predicted for the Super Bowl.
Now we’re the doghouse again. Go figure, lol.
Looks like they didn't put much effort into the NFC North
really EJ #22?
How can you call Cedric Griffin or Hester veterens? yes they aren’t rookies but they certainly can’t be called “veteren’s”
Chester Taylor is a starter calibur player, #28 would be a top backup.
And finally, for the biggest question ever concieved by man? Who are these mythical six players better then AP????
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
The Mystery Six
1) Peyton Manning, QB, Indianapolis – 4.8 (on a 5.0 scale)
2) Tom Brady, QB, New England – 4.75
3) Larry Fitzgerald, WR, Arizona – 4.65
4) DeMarcus Ware, OLB, Dallas – 4.65
5) Drew Brees, QB, New Orleans – 4.5
6) Andre Johnson, WR, Houston – 4.5
7) Adrian Peterson, RB, Minnesota – 4.5
Baltimore FS Ed Reed and Jared Allen are also rated at 4.5 out of 5.0. Reed is listed as the 8th best player in the NFL, while Allen is listed at #9.
The Daily Norseman - The greatest Vikings' site on the Internet!
by Christopher Gates on Jun 2, 2009 8:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Really????
Tom Brady could be horrible this year..how do you rate a guy that sat out all year last year higher than AP…also Brees is better how???
Are you serious? Drew Brees was something like 15, maybe it was 45, yards away from setting the single-season mark for Passing Yards. How does that not make him better than Peterson, who had a respectable 1700 yards, which several RBs have gotten in their years. And Tom Brady is definitely more valuable than Peterson. The guy has 3 Rings and the single-season TD record.
I’m not so sure about Andre Johnson being above Peterson, but 7 isn’t bad. I’d have to definitely agree with their top 5. Except maybe put Brees ahead of Ware.
Laughable!
So Brady gets a top rating despite his injury, while EJ gets a crap rating because of his injury, and CT gets the doghouse because he’s flying wingman to AP.
Ah well…. at least it’s football…. :)
How did CT get the doghouse?
They ranked him the 28th best RB in the league! That’s better than 4 other team’s starters, and any other #2 RB! I took that as a compliment! Haha
by PurplePeopleEaters09 on Jun 3, 2009 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Adrian is better
Adrian should be at least 3rd, maybe 2nd.
DeMarcus Ware is a great rusher but he is useless against the run and in coverage. You should be able to do at least one of those to be ranked the 4th best PLAYER in the entire league don’t you think?
Andre Johnson led the league in receiving last year, and I’m not taking that away from him. The fact remains that it was his first consistent year. His stats were padded by being the only legitimate WR threat.
Drew Brees is a good passer, but again his stats were padded last season by throwing 50 times a game. A case could be made for him being ahead of Peterson but I don’t buy it.
Larry Fitzgerald. Not taking anything away from him, he’s a tremendous player. But people forget that until the playoffs, Andre Johnson was the consensus best WR in the league. All of the sudden, Fitz goes off and he’s all anyone can talk about. He’s good but I need to see more before I can put him ahead of AD.
Brady is coming off an injury so he’s an unknown. Would be better than Adrian if he comes back like in 2007. It remains to be seen though.
Obviously these rankings are flawed or EJ wouldn’t be #22, Antoine wouldn’t be #8, Taylor wouldn’t be #28, McKinnie wouldn’t be #12 (really? 11 LT’s better than him?) and Berrian wouldn’t be unlisted. Obviously Sage and Jackson aren’t elite QB’s right now but you’d have a hard time convincing me that there are 27 QB’s better than Sage (or Jackson for that matter).
Mmmmno. Manning, Brees, and Brady are all worth more to a team than Peterson would be. I mean, he’s good, but come on. Peterson is not top 3 good. If he could catch the ball, pass-protect better, and not fumble 9 times in a season, then maybe. But he hasn’t done that yet. He’s not as complete as the other guys on that list.
When Rushing the ball, and Defense wins
The Vikings have a great season ahead of them…. Our QB’s will be very successful. and I meant to say QB’s Plural…. they will both play,,,,, and my thought is 12-4 at the worst..
Go Vikings
SKOL
Strength of schedule
In 2008 the Vikes had one of the toughest schedules in the league by strength of schedule (2nd or 3rd if I remember correctly). They had a combination of bad Jackson-Frerotte-good Jackson as quarterback, the worst coverage teams in the league and still won 10 games.
In 2009 the Vikings have the 3rd easiest schedule and have improved on offense )need I say Harvin) and defense (by EJ being healthy), plus the competition making the winner of the QB battle than they were before. With all that and now Childress opening up his playbook… 9-7? What was the writer smoking? He had to be a Bears fan. That, or drugs must be the only explanation.
It may take a village to raise a child, but it takes a Viking to raze a village.
+2
Yeppers! That’s another huge issue that they’re ignoring. Even if Cutler comes out swinging for the Bears and has a great year, it’s going to be an uphill battle with the schedule they have. Rodgers may be ready to rock, but the Pack is in the same place. That’s why I predicted a 12-4 record for the Vikes in 2009, and a 9-7 shootout between the Bears and Cheesers. And if the QB situation straightens out, it could be better than 12-4 :)
Umm, the Bear technically have an easier schedule than us. I’m pretty sure they’re either the first or second easiest schedule, based on last year’s win-loss records.
Technically....
Whew. I’d like to talk to the guy who’s figuring out who gets where in the schedules. Not that I particularly care if the Bears have a harder schedule (I don’t think that’s an easy schedule for a team that didn’t even make the playoffs), but I do have some qualms with how the draft sequence played out. Seems to me that the Eagles beat the Vikes in the WC, and then proceeded to get a higher draft position. ‘Technically’ is, I think, some equations that need to be looked at.
Strength of Schedule Is Basically Meaningless...
Unless your team is playing last year’s rosters. Strength of schedule is only meaningful in retrospect, not as a predictor.
For instance, The Vikes, Pack and Bears are ALL playing the NFC West and AFC North this season. The NFC West was TERRIBLE last year, but do you think that Arizona isn’t going to be able to come out and have a better season than 9-7? Do you think that Seattle is going to stink it up this season? I don’t. In fact, Seattle could be downright good this year. 49ers should be respectable. The Rams will still be the Rams.
The AFC North has two awful teams from last year, but two AFC powerhouses in Pitt and Baltimore and Cinci should be moderately better with Carson Palmer healthy again. I don’t think ANY of the NFC North teams are going to be having at easy as their “strength of schedule” designation would lead you to believe.
um, Packers secondary gets an A-?!? (and other thoughts)
The Cheesedoodles’ cornerbacks—Al Harris and Charles Woodson—are both on the wrong side of 30. Nick Collins and Atari Bigby just don’t scare me. The difference between those four and the Vikes’ back four—Winfield, Griffin, Williams, and Johnson—is nowhere near a full letter grade. Surely, Harris and Woodson are better man-to-man cover corners than Winfield and Griffin; but the cover-2 system that Minnesota employs doesn’t ask Winfield and Griffin to run down the sidelines that often. It asks them to rough-up receivers at the line of scrimmage, and to make tough tackles on the edge. Green Bay tackling back there is shoddy across the board. Doesn’t anybody at PFW remember when Purple Jesus flat-out flattened Al Harris? Secondaries don’t function purely as pass coverage. They’re asked to tackle, too.
The Vikes’ special teams grade of a C is well-deserved—and they’re probably taking into account the improvement that Harvin will bring to the return teams, too. We’ve got to pick up the slack there.
Who would’ve thought a year ago that Shank would be a top 15 TE? Seriously.
Why doesn’t our DL get an A+? What other D-line boasts three players of that caliber?
I agree. Henderson got shafted.
The Bears’ WR corps doesn’t even deserve a C; their TEs must be boosting an otherwise abysmal group.
Also, the rookie Stafford and the broken Culpepper get a full letter grade better than Jackson and Rosenfels? That’s ricockulous.
Matty B, Valhalla love ‘im, just isn’t a top-10 center anymore. Sorry, all you fellas in Bal’more, but you’re going to find that out the hard way after seeing Flacco smacked around by a few AFC North nose-tackles, interior linebackers, and the occasional flying Polamalu.
by virginia viking on Jun 2, 2009 10:11 PM CDT reply actions
Midwest version
I’m in Ohio(I might be the only viking fan here), my cover of the same mag has Calvin Johnson, Carson Palmer and Joe Thomas on it… They were a little harsh on our Qb’s, our quarterbacks weren’t worse than special teams last year… I hope E.J. sees that he is #22!! even though he doesn’t need motivation!!! Overall I liked the issue because it gave player rankings and went in depth into each teams units on Offense and Defense, Athlon’s is out now, it kinda glosses over each team… and as you all know any info we can get this time of year, eat it up even if we don’t agree with some of it… Countdown has begun!!!
Midwest version part 2.
I forgot to mention, the Bernard Berrian omission is horrible, lead the league in avg per catch(not to mention 99 big ones) and be left out!!!
I agree
In addition to leading the league in YPC he has to be one of the fastest players in the game so he gets seperation pretty easily.
sugar + water + purple
Not Drinkin' It
BB didn’t demonstrate anything resembling breakaway speed last year until the final few games, where he started to look faster. The first 12 games or so, the secondaries draped all over him like a cheap suit. The only explaination I could come up with for it is that he started the year out with that jammed toe, and the injury may have nagged at him for a while. Still not sure that he has the speed of a true #1 WR (which is why the Vikes had a speedy WR at the top of the draft list), but here’s hoping he does.
Now if we can just get through the preseason without any 1st string injuries…
HE'S GOT THE SPEED...
he just doesn’t do much else. He’s not a great hands/possession guy. He doesn’t create in space. He’s a straight line burner- and a #2 receiver. And the Vikings paid too much for him.
Just as a point of reference
Here’s the WR list:
1) Fitzgerald
2) Andre Johnson
3) Randy Moss
4) Calvin Johnson
5) Steve Smith
6) Wayne
7) Marshall
8) Boldin
9) Jennings
10) Welker
11) Roddy White
12) Houshmandzadeh
13) Bowe
14) T.O.
15) Braylon Edwards
16) Holmes
17) Colston
18) Driver
19) Santana Moss
20) Bryant
21) Ochocinco
22) Evans
23) Ward
24) Roy Williams
25) Royal
“Best of the Rest”
Lance Moore, Torry Holt, Derrick Mason, Plaxico Burress, Laveranues Coles, Vincent Jackson
“Top Veteran Prospects”
Donnie Avery, Steve Breaston, Jerricho Cotchery, Ted Ginn, Jr., Anthony Gonzalez, Devin Hester, Johnnie Lee Higgins, Jason Hill, Josh Morgan, Jordy Nelson, Nate Washington
Nope. . .not a single mention of Bernard Berrian on the list. You have absolutely, positively be freaking kidding me. According to this, there are (at least) 42 NFL wide receivers that are all better than Bernard Berrian. What a complete and utter joke.
The Daily Norseman - The greatest Vikings' site on the Internet!
by Christopher Gates on Jun 2, 2009 11:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Half of those “top veteran prospects” are the third option on their own team and barely saw coverage, and still couldn’t hold Berrian jock… what a joke
Jared Allen is to football what Jason Voorhees is to Lake Crystal.
Percy Harvin is Devin Hester, except someone very smart decided to teach him how to catch and run routes.
One problem with this list
is that they don’t know what a veteren is. sereusly, Jordy Nelson and Devin Hester? those two are not veterens. to be a veteren you have to have been around long enough to have seen it all, those guys will only be in their 4th year! not being a rookie any more is not the only qualification for being a veteren. you have to have been around long enough to no longer qualify as “young” to be a veteren.
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jun 3, 2009 7:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Technically
A veteran is defined as not being a rookie. In other words, if you’re in your 2nd year, you’re a veteran. Now, seasoned veteran is different. But that term is subjective.
can't be possible...
either he was missing from their list when they came up with these rankings….or a better explanation is that the guy caught BB nailing his kid sister………
"Somewhere in Minnesota, a child becomes a Vikings fan and wonders if they will win a Super Bowl in their lifetime"
well...
at least it gave us all something to read/talk about.
by iseepurplepeople on Jun 3, 2009 12:13 PM CDT reply actions
horrible...
keeping Berrian out of it and the shaft on Henderson is ridiculous. Also, what is up with Hutch being the #1 Guard yet he’s not in the top 50?
Yes Cutler can play...
… but what he can he produce with poor receivers? I’m expecting Orton to have a better season than Cutler, even though he doesn’t have the talent in the position. I’d be probably name Aaron Rodgers as the best QB in the NFC north anyway… Just glad that the line in Green Bay still isn’t that great! It’ll be interesting to see what Culpepper does in Detroit – I can’t see them getting their #1 draft pick beaten up like David Carr… Although I am talking about the Detroit Lions here…
I’m not over-sold on Berrian. He’s good, but not elite. A few of his big plays last year came from players tripping. There is an argument for him being in the later part of that 25 (he certainly doesn’t have as many drops as Braylon Edwards), but I’m not that bothered that they didn’t include him.
I agree that Berrian probably isn’t a top rated WR, not top 20…. but maybe some time thereafter… 22 or 23. You’re dead on about his performance last year, his speed really suffered in the first part of the season. But towards the end he was picking it up. The thing is, Berrian’s YPG leader status alone should put him on the list.
When I did a direct comparison between Orton and Cutler, it was surprising to see how close they both were. Cutler may have been an upgrade, but he wasn’t a drastic upgrade. Rodgers has the advantage of having been able to sit back and grow into the big-boy shoes for a few years, I think that’s necessary for your typical 1st string QB. There aren’t too many prodigies that can step up as rookies and do consistently well.
Top Veteran Prospects
I’ve gotten the Pro Football Weekly preview every year for the past 20 years now. It’s easily the best of the football magazine previews out there. The top veteran prospects are just under the radar guys that could break out this year. Think fantasy sleepers. They’re not supposed to be rated better than the receivers not ranked top 25.
As for the Jay Cutler subject I tend to side with KC Joyner’s position. Cutler for the past two years has continued force throws and one of the worst bad pass ratios for starting qb’s (forced throws, pass that could’ve and should’ve been int). He actually kind of reminds me of Tommy Kramer in his early years for the old guys here.
It's a fair knock...
it would be really bad if he threw for a poor percentage, but I’d imagine a lot of those things will smooth themselves out as he matures. If he matures.
Also, what’s a pass that “should have/could have” been picked off. That’s a nonsensical criteria. Heck, I even think INT’s are inflated- what about tipped passes, dropped or batted passes by WR’s, throws at the end of ballgames (what, should the QB have not gone for the big pass at the end of a game?), deep throws on 3rd that are as good as punts? I actually think that about 50-70% of INT’s thrown are actually the QB’s fault, depending on the QB.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Daily Norseman
Related FanShots on Daily Norseman
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
