Colts BR 1000 CB Colt rankings

[12isthenew18]

101. Toler

79. Butler

2. Vontae!

Marcus Burley finished 37( Herrera better be good)

[RealityIsLuck]

Darius seems criminally underrated. Great to see the Votae recognition. 

[Flash7]

Here's a link to the list:  http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2011295-br-nfl-1000-top-100-cornerbacks

 

Before people criticize BR for listing either Toler or Butler too low, they have listed Vontae at #2. So if you are going to criticize the list for being inaccurate, then you have to be willing to say that the list is not reliable, and therefore, Vontae being listed at #2 may not be reliable either.

 

Overall, I think it's just a list and the players face so many different situations/variables that it's hard to quantify their ranked order. I think you can have a general agreement on the very best players, (top 10-ish) and the rest isn't that important.

[indyagent17]

These lists are good for this time of year

[bestQBever]

Here's a link to the list:  http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2011295-br-nfl-1000-top-100-cornerbacks

 

Before people criticize BR for listing either Toler or Butler too low, they have listed Vontae at #2. So if you are going to criticize the list for being inaccurate, then you have to be willing to say that the list is not reliable, and therefore, Vontae being listed at #2 may not be reliable either.

 

Overall, I think it's just a list and the players face so many different situations/variables that it's hard to quantify their ranked order. I think you can have a general agreement on the very best players, (top 10-ish) and the rest isn't that important.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2507536-br-nfl-1000-ranking-the-top-101-cornerbacks-from-2014(the actual link)

[Smonroe]

101. Toler

79. Butler

2. Vontae!

Marcus Burley finished 37( Herrera better be good)

 

I wouldn't be too concerned about Burley.  That article has him listed higher than two guys he plays behind on his own team.  I'm not sure if he was hurt the end of the year, but Seattle had him inactive on gameday from about December on.  I don't think he's anything special.

 

Lists like this are supposed to be subjective and give people something to talk about.  Just for fun I looked at the previous years list and Toler and Butler each fell almost 20 spots from 14 to 15.  Whatever.

[Smonroe]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2507536-br-nfl-1000-ranking-the-top-101-cornerbacks-from-2014(the actual link)

 That's the link if you're interested in looking at their 2014 rankings.  It was kind of interesting to see how guys moved up or down.

[ColtsLegacy]

IIRC, In 2013 list (2012 season) Davis was ~30 and Toler was ~25.

[Hoosiernsavga]

Great to see Davis at #2. Butler I think should be a little higher but I think Toler is too high even at #101.

[Nobody]

Huh? Toler is 83 and Butler 61. edit- nvm, bestQBever linked to the wrong article

 

 

Great to see Davis at #2. Butler I think should be a little higher but I think Toler is too high even at #101.

Come on now. The dude was inconsistent but he was shutdown sometimes.

[ColtsLegacy]

Huh? Toler is 83 and Butler 61. 

 

`Nope, that was last years list. Here's this years: http://bleacherrepor...acks-from-2014

[lollygagger8]

Vontae getting some love!!! 

[Coffeedrinker]

Here's a link to the list:  http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2011295-br-nfl-1000-top-100-cornerbacks

 

Before people criticize BR for listing either Toler or Butler too low, they have listed Vontae at #2. So if you are going to criticize the list for being inaccurate, then you have to be willing to say that the list is not reliable, and therefore, Vontae being listed at #2 may not be reliable either.

 

Overall, I think it's just a list and the players face so many different situations/variables that it's hard to quantify their ranked order. I think you can have a general agreement on the very best players, (top 10-ish) and the rest isn't that important.

So we have to agree with the whole list or none of it?  IMO, I would have Davis at number 2, Butler seems about right, if not a little high but Toler should be higher than Butler and he should be higher than he was in 2013 because he played much better last year than he did the year before.  

 

I didn't read the article but I assume Toler's penalties is a reason why he is lower than his play would indicate.

[Flash7]

So we have to agree with the whole list or none of it?  IMO, I would have Davis at number 2, Butler seems about right, if not a little high but Toler should be higher than Butler and he should be higher than he was in 2013 because he played much better last year than he did the year before.  

 

I didn't read the article but I assume Toler's penalties is a reason why he is lower than his play would indicate.

Hey, Coffeedrinker. To address your question -- No, of course you don't have to agree to the whole list. In fact, you don't have to agree with any of it if you don't want to. After all, it's just a list by Bleacher Report.

 

My comment resulted from the following:

 

1. There were certain criteria applied that led to the rankings. The same criteria was applied throughout the list and that's how they derived their rankings. So, if Davis was #2 based on that criteria and we are all okay with that, then why question Toler's or Butler's ranking if their ranking resulted from the same criteria? 

 

2. If their criteria is flawed, then perhaps Davis' ranking is flawed as well?

 

3. Not that you do this, but it does drive me crazy when a listing/ranking or article comes out and Colts fans go crazy if Colts players are not ranked high or praised in some article. That ranking or writer is immediately criticized for having a different opinion.

[tpry1965]

Well NFL top 100 and Bleacher Report need to get on the same page. I've alwyas trusted B/r the most.

[Coffeedrinker]

Hey, Coffeedrinker. To address your question -- No, of course you don't have to agree to the whole list. In fact, you don't have to agree with any of it if you don't want to. After all, it's just a list by Bleacher Report.

 

My comment resulted from the following:

 

1. There were certain criteria applied that led to the rankings. The same criteria was applied throughout the list and that's how they derived their rankings. So, if Davis was #2 based on that criteria and we are all okay with that, then why question Toler's or Butler's ranking if their ranking resulted from the same criteria? 

 

2. If their criteria is flawed, then perhaps Davis' ranking is flawed as well?

 

3. Not that you do this, but it does drive me crazy when a listing/ranking or article comes out and Colts fans go crazy if Colts players are not ranked high or praised in some article. That ranking or writer is immediately criticized for having a different opinion.

I'm not good with using emoticons, but that comment about agreeing with all or none was mostly tongue in cheek.  Sorry that I came across that way.

[MTC]

Greg Toler #101.... Ouch

I really hope DJ ends up starting day 1.

[Hoosiernsavga]

Huh? Toler is 83 and Butler 61. edit- nvm, bestQBever linked to the wrong article

 

 

Come on now. The dude was inconsistent but he was shutdown sometimes.

I don't think Toler is horrible, but like you said he is very inconsistent. Hell he holds more than Mayweather!