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

[vallin21]

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.

[sportscurmudgeon]

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.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by vallin21

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.

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.