Which NFL roster would you least like to take over if you were a GM? | Page 2

Sjceruti · 2011-11-18T02:40:25-08:00

Essentially which roster is the worst in football to start building a team? What made me think about this was actually playing madden. I like to sometimes take over a bad NFL team and simulate the games just making roster moves and drafting to improve the team. Here are the teams with the worst records this season who might be in the running. Indianapolis Colts: The Colts actually have a pretty awful roster (going from division champs w/ Manning to potentially no wins without him). You look at the two DE's who are good but are getting up there in age and wouldnt be counted on for much in the future. DT's are non existent, linebackers outside Angerer are mosly backups, and the secondary outside Bethea isnt very good either. Offensive line is absolutely terrible just about across the board. Manning is great but is nearing the end. I will say I think their offensive skill players are solid. Clark. Wayne, Garcon, Collie etc are good receivers...but the backs could be upgraded. Roster grade: D St. Louis Rams: The Rams thought they had the QB of the future when Bradford played well last season...I've never been high on him as some of you know. I think he is limited throwing downfield and struggle with pressure. Stephen Jackson wont be elite much longer the way they've used him. Receivers are average at best even with Lloyd. DL is good and relatively young on the edges and the same goes for the LB's. Secondary is very bad. Roster Grade: C- Miami Dolphins: The Dolphins to me are a franchise QB away from being a playoff contender year in and year out. The Defense is good. Solid pash rushers and a good defensive line with some good young players. The corners are good not great but the safeties could use an upgrade. Offensively their line is alright...great LT but can be upgraded at probably 2-3 positions including RT. Playmakers are good with Marshall and Bess. They could use a steady RB but I dont hate this area. Roster Grade: B- Carolina Panthers: The Panthers have appeared to find their franchise QB...turns it over a lot but he's a rookie and he's making plays. The Panthers need defensive line help badly especially in the interior. A run stopping DT would go a long way for them. LB's are solid...Beason going down was a huge blow though. Secondary is alright...I think its actually similar to the 49ers especially at the safety spot. Offensive line is alright but could be improved at the guard position. Their receivers outside of Smith are no names but make plays and of course they have 2 good TE's. Plus they should be set at RB Roster Grade: B Minnesota Vikings: The Vikings like Ponder...well see how that turns out but he's got potential. AP is a monster even with a very suspect offensive line. They will need to upgrade that area along with the WR position. Harvin is good but not a #1. Defensive line is getting older but still good. LB's are so-so. Greenway is great but that's about all they have. Secondary needs much improvement as well. Roster Grade: C+ The remaining teams in the hunt are Arizona, Seattle, Cleveland, Jacksonville, and Washington I wont go into great detail over these teams but here are short observations: Arizona - Horrible roster...will elaborate further below Seattle - Actually solid on defense...need a QB badly Cleveland - Going to have to make a decision on McCoy...but he needs weapons BADLY. Defense isnt terrible but LB's are a need. Jacksonville - They believe Gabbert is the guy...but he needs weapons as well. Above average defense which will keep them in games. Washington - Offensively they're just about at the bottom. No WR's...average RB's and NO QB. Defensively I like them a lot but cant carry the offense. My pick for worst NFL Roster: Arizona Cardinals The Cardinals have 2 elite players (Fitz and Peterson). Outside that this is as limited a roster as there is. Defensive line is actually decent with Campbell and Dockett but Dockett has already started to regress as he ages. They dont really have NT and in a 3-4 you're gonna need one of those. LB's are just bad. In the middle they can get by but again as a 3-4 team they have no passrushers which makes their already suspect secondary look worse. Safeties are run defenders and always a risk against the pass. Peterson cant carry the team like Revis. Offensively they have what may be the worse line in the league. Not one guy who should be a starter. Major upgrades needed. Fitz is a monster and without him they would struggle to score at all. RB's are average. I liked Ryan Williams coming out of college but his injury now worried me and Beanie Wells isnt the answer they thought he'd be as a 1st rounder. Other WR's are average as well and Todd Heap at this point in his careers cannot get the job done and really cant stay healthy. So there are my observations...would love to get a discussion going!

Nov 19, 2011 at 12:11 PM

#16

dhp318
Veteran
Posts: 4,924

How can the answer not be the Browns.

Nov 19, 2011 at 9:17 PM

#17

LasVegasWally
Veteran
Posts: 24,876

Browns BUT a GM has to deal with the owner and Snyder is awful.

Nov 23, 2011 at 7:48 AM

#18

Bejaard49er
Veteran
Posts: 971

Nice analysis of teams

Washington - OL is horrible, average RB, might as well cut all of their QB's. Who know how well Cooley and Holmes will play when they come back from injury next year. Accept for Fletcher (who is getting old in football years) Okopora and Landry don't have much on the defensive side of the ball. In addition if you blew up this team how much dead money would you have to deal with and for how long?

Nov 23, 2011 at 7:52 AM

#19

Kolohe
Hall of Fame
Posts: 67,009

Indy minus Peyton Manning tops the list.

Nov 23, 2011 at 8:30 AM

#20

lamontb
Veteran
Posts: 33,207

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Browns BUT a GM has to deal with the owner and Snyder is awful.

I don't think most coaches would call Synder awful. He gives you the money and power to do what you want. He just keeps hiring the wrong ppl. Shanahan dropped the ball on Mcnabb, and then again with Grossman/Beck.

Nov 23, 2011 at 12:08 PM

#21

HearstFan
Veteran
Posts: 1,680

I'd have to say the Colts roster would be horrible to have to rebuild -- they need upgrades or youth almost everywhere. But they have a good organization, so as a coach with a multi-year plan, at least you might be able to make progress.

Nov 23, 2011 at 12:11 PM

#22

HearstFan
Veteran
Posts: 1,680

Woops, you asked as a GM - not as a coach. Hmmm, as a GM I'd hate to take over the Browns. I just don't see that ownership enabling the GM the right way.

Nov 23, 2011 at 4:15 PM

#23

communist
Veteran
Posts: 12,475

Jags, Cards, Browns.

Nov 24, 2011 at 2:06 AM

#24

Overkill
Moderator
Posts: 11,904

I'd take the Colts. I'd love to build a franchise from the ground up with a great owner. Particularly if they get the #1 overall and Peyton gets healthy. Getting Luck or a boatload of draft picks looks like an ideal start to me.

My last choice would actually be Denver. I want no part of the Tebow situation.

Nov 24, 2011 at 3:21 AM

#25

DaFaro49ers
Veteran
Posts: 1,569

EASILY wouldnt want to own the STL RAMS

Nov 24, 2011 at 11:03 AM

#26

TheChozen
Veteran
Posts: 5,964

Honestly, I'd say the Cowboys. I know Jerry Jones is the GM and he'll never give that up but he's such a control freak over every aspect, I don't think I could do that job if he did hire a GM. Not to mention, I can't stand Dallas or Jerry Jones.

If I'm gonna be a GM, sit back and sign the checks. Let me do my job.

Nov 24, 2011 at 12:09 PM

#27

oldtimer49er
Veteran
Posts: 205

the browns. at least indy has a franchise QB.

Nov 24, 2011 at 12:18 PM

#28

horsecore
Veteran
Posts: 4,280

Originally posted by oldtimer49er:
the browns. at least indy has a franchise QB.

One would assume....there is no guarantee Peyton comes back.