FoxSports: Ranking the NFL: Insider grading on every franchise

Earlier this year, an NFL head coach challenged me on something I said about an organization being "great."

He told me to crunch the numbers. So I did.
As a result, we have our first annual NFL organization rankings here on FOXSports.com.
Every NFL team was graded on eight categories:

Owner
Front office
Head coach
Coaching staff
Quarterback
Offense
Defense
Intangibles

click here for the rest of the article and rankings.....

NFL - Ranking the NFL: Insider grading on every franchise - FOX Sports on MSN

So what do you guys think about these rankings? I actually find it interesting the Skins were ranked 24th. The way these rankings are set up I would of guessed the Skins would of been in the bottom 5.

Heres my Top 5 and Bottom 5 based off of the 8 categories....

Top 5 Franchises (I actually agree with the top 5 I just have them in a different order)
1. Steelers
2. Patriots
3. Eagles
4. Giants
5. Ravens

Bottom 5 Franchises
1. Lions
2. Bengals
3. Browns
4. Broncos
5. Raiders

[Nflnick11]

I'd put us at 12

[rbanerjee23]

yeah too bad adam schein is a dipshit who is consistent only in that he is wrong year in and year out on his predictions for how the season will turn out...lets think about this for a second, he said the redskins scored low for coach, owner, and whatever VC is. While I agree that the owner and VC are not the greatest, consider the fact that Jim Zorn, in his first season, with a new system in the NFC East, hands down toughest division in the NFL (no team was under .500), went 8-8. If they were in a different division, they would easily have been the 1 or 2 team and being touted as a "team to watch" going forward. Ohh, did I mention that Adam Schein is a tard?

Originally Posted by Nflnick11

I'd put us at 12

I actually had us 27th. They just escaped my bottom 5.

When I factored all 8 of the categories it was hard for me to rank the Skins highly.

Owner - Id say average at best when you factor in everything. Snyder spends to win and thats always a positive. At the sametime his track record over the years in making decisions is very questionable to say the least.

Front office - Id also say its average at best. The front office has made solid moves this offseason. I think the track record yet again though over the years leaves doubt into how good the FO really is or ever can be.

Head coach - Probably one of the worst head coaches in the league going off of last season. Zorn does have the potenial to grow into the role of Head Coach.

Coaching staff - Solid staff overall but there are some question marks and areas for concern.

Quarterback - Bottom 10 in the league as of today. Campbell has the potenial to improve at QB just like Zorn does at HC.

Offense - Last season had its highs and lows. As of right now the offense has alot of question marks. The QB, WR, and OL positions all have different aspects which could turn positive or negative.

Defense - 4th ranked defense from last season gets better with the additions of Haynesworth and Orakpo.

Intangibles - Right now everything is against the Skins. From playing in the tough NFC East to the lack of wins over the years.

The only category where the Skins rank in the top 10 of the league imo is on defense. I do think our team has alot of potenial and could rise up this list to the middle of the pack in the next year or two.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

Head coach - Probably one of the worst head coaches in the league going off of last season. Zorn does have the potenial to grow into the role of Head Coach.

So you're telling me that Zorn, a rookie coach who went 8-8 in one of the toughest conferences in the league, was worst than Jack Del Rio (5-11), Herm Edwards (2-14), Romeo Crennel (4-12), Marvin Lewis (4-11-1), Mike McCarthy (6-10), Scott Linehan/Jim Haslett (2-14), Lane Kiffin/Tom Cable (5-11), and Mike Holmgren (4-12)?

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

So you're telling me that Zorn, a rookie coach who went 8-8 in one of the toughest conferences in the league, was worst than Jack Del Rio (5-11), Herm Edwards (2-14), Romeo Crennel (4-12), Marvin Lewis (4-11-1), Mike McCarthy (6-10), Scott Linehan/Jim Haslett (2-14), Lane Kiffin/Tom Cable (5-11), and Mike Holmgren (4-12)?

Basing off of how the Skins offense performed in the 2nd half as of right now yes hes one of the worst Head Coaches in the NFL. The problem imo is last season was his first calling plays in the NFL. He looked good early on but into the 2nd half when teams knew everything he was doing he couldnt adjust. If you cant adjust to what the defense does as a offensive playcaller thats a huge problem.

I do realize he was a rookie Head Coach last season. I also realize he can improve in his 2nd season. Thats why I said he has the potenial to grow into the HC position. As of right now though I have to say hes one of the worst coaches in the NFL until he can show me he can adjust when a defense locks into what he is doing.

[WaldSkins]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

Basing off of how the Skins offense performed in the 2nd half as of right now yes hes one of the worst Head Coaches in the NFL. The problem imo is last season was his first calling plays in the NFL. He looked good early on but into the 2nd half when teams knew everything he was doing he couldnt adjust. If you cant adjust to what the defense does as a offensive playcaller thats a huge problem.

I do realize he was a rookie Head Coach last season. I also realize he can improve in his 2nd season. Thats why I said he has the potenial to grow into the HC position. As of right now though I have to say hes one of the worst coaches in the NFL until he can show me he can adjust when a defense locks into what he is doing.

So know offensive line had anything to do with it?

Originally Posted by WaldSkins

So know offensive line had anything to do with it?

The offensive line had problems and Campbell had problems with his accuracy as the season went along. I do think the biggest problem the Skins had in the 2nd half of 2008 though was Zorns inability to adjust to what defenses threw at him.

[GTripp0012]

Cruching the Numbers is, as of today, officially a cliche.

[GTripp0012]

Why does the quarterback get factored into organizational rankings? Is he supposed to transcend the rest of the team or something? And aren't a lot of these redundant categories, with no mutual exclusivity? And I'm glad he's ratings intangibles on a 1-10 scale, therefore making them quite tangible.

This has got to be the stupidest exercise in the history of the internet.

[wilsowilso]

The off-season is long and painful, but we will survive.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Why does the quarterback get factored into organizational rankings? Is he supposed to transcend the rest of the team or something? And aren't a lot of these redundant categories, with no mutual exclusivity? And I'm glad he's ratings intangibles on a 1-10 scale, therefore making them quite tangible.

This has got to be the stupidest exercise in the history of the internet.

Seriously. I've been biting my fist trying to resist the temptation to add a post to a thread dedicated to something so unbelievably stupid.

I understand there isn't much to talk about around the NFL right now, but if you're going to make a "grading" article that is this bush league, at least have the integrity to title it "I have nothing better to do and I'm pulling this out of thin air."

The funny thing is Adam Schein calls this "Insider grading." Insider?? Inside what? A vaccuum that is void of all football knowledge?

[GTripp0012]

The thing is: actually grading organizations isn't hard. A team's win percentage over a period of time is a terrible measure of it's QB, or it's head coach, or it's offense, but it's an excellent measure of the overall effectiveness of the organization. If you want to account for factors like market size, that's pretty easy as well. You can create a function that divides win percentage by gross revenues. Not at all hard.

Instead, we had arbitrary number crunching to arrive at more or less the same outcome. The rankings appear to be just fine, it's just an incredibly stupid methodology to waste everyone's time.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The thing is: actually grading organizations isn't hard. A team's win percentage over a period of time is a terrible measure of it's QB, or it's head coach, or it's offense, but it's an excellent measure of the overall effectiveness of the organization. If you want to account for factors like market size, that's pretty easy as well. You can create a function that divides win percentage by gross revenues. Not at all hard.

Instead, we had arbitrary number crunching to arrive at more or less the same outcome. The rankings appear to be just fine, it's just an incredibly stupid methodology to waste everyone's time.

Agreed. It screams "obligatory space filler" or "I get paid by the word." Or both.

[djnemo65]

The idea that QB, owner, and "intangibles" are all measurable things that can be compared with each other on a 10 point scale is so mind-bogglingly retarded that reading that article just shaved 5 points off of my IQ.