National Recognition?? 2025 Cardinals ranked 17th best roster in the NFL

[oaken1]

MSN

MSN has the Redbirds ranked as the 17th best roster in the NFL. a notable improvement from previous years.
Considering the fire and effort coach JG and his staff have managed to get out of our players thus far....a ranking like this could see us as a top 10 team this season.
we all know the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts...and now the sum of our parts is being recognized as at least a top 20 group.

 

[Chopper0080]

I think Monti has put together a roster full of above average to below average players. I like Brandon Thorn's rankings as he ranks players 1-7 but with 1,2,6,7 as being rare. His 3-5 are ranked as stated above average to below average, and in his words, make up the majority of NFL rosters. 17 sounds about right. The Cardinals young players will need to take steps forward to improve this ranking.

 

[kerouac9]

FWIW, these rankings are from Aaron Schatz and ESPN, not from MSN.

Nary a word said about the offense, interestingly.

 

[oaken1]

FWIW, these rankings are from Aaron Schatz and ESPN, not from MSN.

Nary a word said about the offense, interestingly.

considering we were about top 12 on offense last year that seems appropriate. a strong defensive improvement can easily move us up the rankings several positions.

I was contemplating how easily this ranking could change though with some minor offensive improvements.

Kyler has never been a 4000 yard passer... but what if....?

2500 yards from the WR room....
1500 yards from the TE room.....
400 yards from the RB room.....

while those jumps would seriously bump our offense they are not really huge... Marv hits 1300 yds...Mike Wilson hits 900...then 300 between Dortch, Jones, et al....

1100 for McBride....400 between HiggyBear and Tip...

Conner and Benson can both get 200 yards fairly easily....

The biggest jump in all that is Marv, and we are kinda expecting that type of jump from him anyway. If Kyler hits 4400 yards passing, then adds 350 or so running...I think our offense is pretty easily top ten and knocking at top 5...and those types of stats would bump us up pretty high in the overall roster rankings as well

 

[kerouac9]

considering we were about top 12 on offense last year that seems appropriate. a strong defensive improvement can easily move us up the rankings several positions.

I was contemplating how easily this ranking could change though with some minor offensive improvements.

Kyler has never been a 4000 yard passer... but what if....?

2500 yards from the WR room....
1500 yards from the TE room.....
400 yards from the RB room.....

while those jumps would seriously bump our offense they are not really huge... Marv hits 1300 yds...Mike Wilson hits 900...then 300 between Dortch, Jones, et al....

1100 for McBride....400 between HiggyBear and Tip...

Conner and Benson can both get 200 yards fairly easily....

The biggest jump in all that is Marv, and we are kinda expecting that type of jump from him anyway. If Kyler hits 4400 yards passing, then adds 350 or so running...I think our offense is pretty easily top ten and knocking at top 5...and those types of stats would bump us up pretty high in the overall roster rankings as well

Kyler hitting 4400 yards passing would have been 3rd in the NFL last year.

Those yards are going to come from somewhere -- probably the running game. We're not going to conjure 800 additional yards of passing offense from nowhere. Some of it is going to fall out of the running game.

 

[oaken1]

Kyler hitting 4400 yards passing would have been 3rd in the NFL last year.

Those yards are going to come from somewhere -- probably the running game. We're not going to conjure 800 additional yards of passing offense from nowhere. Some of it is going to fall out of the running game.

It might. But a good portion of it can also come from our improved defense getting the offense more opportunities.
Im just noting that the numbers needed to get us there on offense are not quite extravagant and certainly not unobtainium... they would however demonstrate a significant boost in our offense. I just wonder if such boost can be achieved without that coordinator guy having a drastic epifany in regards to his offensive style.
I would guess not. when they first got here all the talk was about teaching Kyler to stay in the pocket and play within the system...now suddenly the talk is about running and off schedule plays....they may have given up on the idea of kyler running a traditional NFL style offense

 

[football karma]

I think Monti has put together a roster full of above average to below average players.

wouldnt this describe 100% of nfl rosters?

 

[football karma]

i thought 17 was fair

they had the Bears at 15, which feels a tad optimistic to me.

Packers at 14, Chargers at 16. People are high on those teams.

Cards are right there in the mix

 

[oaken1]

i thought 17 was fair

they had the Bears at 15, which feels a tad optimistic to me.

Packers at 14, Chargers at 16. People are high on those teams.

Cards are right there in the mix

Agree.
I hindsight I got a laugh when I realized I billed a "Dead middle of the pack" ranking as us getting national recognition, lol.
We get shat upon or ignored so often that anything not "DFL" seems like praise.

However, my faith in our coaching staff is such that us having a 17th ranked roster should put us in contention as a top ten team.
Won't that turn some heads.

Getting guys to hustle every snap and continually outplay their talent is an under appreciated skill in pro sports and JG and Rallis have that skill in spades.


I might have to revise my 12-5 prediction to 13-4 ....
Sorry...extra spoonful of hopium in my morning coffee

But what the hell...we are going 20-0 right up until the first loss proves otherwise right?

 

[kerouac9]

wouldnt this describe 100% of nfl rosters?

On the ultimate average, for sure. There are some teams that have a stars and scrubs approach (like New Orleans) where you pack your team with a handful of elite players and fill in the background with rookies and low-level free agents.

Other teams are building from scratch and two years behind where the Cards were in their builds with a bunch of rookies and below-average players like New England and Tennessee.

Then there are some late-stage teams that are top-heavy with veterans and stuff and a couple of miraculous rookie classes where like 12-16 of the starting 22 are above-average starters.

 

[Rivercard]

I hindsight I got a laugh when I realized I billed a "Dead middle of the pack" ranking as us getting national recognition, lol.
We get shat upon or ignored so often that anything not "DFL" seems like praise.

We've finally made it to mediocre!! Woo hoo!!

 

[Chopper0080]

wouldnt this describe 100% of nfl rosters?

I don't think so, but most of them for sure.

 

[kerouac9]

I don't think so, but most of them for sure.

The Cards are very similar to the Packers with a whole lot of mid-tier players but few if any top-line talents (Budda, Conner, and McBride stand out; of course, those are elite players at second-tier positions).

Green Bay's playcaller is their advantage.

 

[PackerNation2025]

The Cards are very similar to the Packers with a whole lot of mid-tier players but few if any top-line talents (Budda, Conner, and McBride stand out; of course, those are elite players at second-tier positions).

Green Bay's playcaller is their advantage.

Not sure you have an intimate knowledge of Green Bay's roster. The 3 clowns ranking NFL rosters have never been near a Packers game or practice. They looked at rosters on paper and ranked them with absolute zero knowledge of said roster and or the players on said roster. I certainly don't think they looked at the current 90 man rosters of teams going into camp.

I don't think I have ever seen a more bogus NFL roster ranking in my 40 plus years following the NFL.

We can do a position by position comparison of the Packers and Cardinals rosters if you so choose.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

Not sure you have an intimate knowledge of Green Bay's roster. The 3 clowns ranking NFL rosters have never been near a Packers game or practice. They looked at rosters on paper and ranked them with absolute zero knowledge of said roster and or the players on said roster. I certainly don't think they looked at the current 90 man rosters of teams going into camp.

I don't think I have ever seen a more bogus NFL roster ranking in my 40 plus years following the NFL.

We can do a position by position comparison of the Packers and Cardinals rosters if you so choose.

comes in guns blazing!

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

On the ultimate average, for sure. There are some teams that have a stars and scrubs approach (like New Orleans) where you pack your team with a handful of elite players and fill in the background with rookies and low-level free agents.

Other teams are building from scratch and two years behind where the Cards were in their builds with a bunch of rookies and below-average players like New England and Tennessee.

Then there are some late-stage teams that are top-heavy with veterans and stuff and a couple of miraculous rookie classes where like 12-16 of the starting 22 are above-average starters.

The Saints have stars?????

 

[kerouac9]

Not sure you have an intimate knowledge of Green Bay's roster. The 3 clowns ranking NFL rosters have never been near a Packers game or practice. They looked at rosters on paper and ranked them with absolute zero knowledge of said roster and or the players on said roster. I certainly don't think they looked at the current 90 man rosters of teams going into camp.

I don't think I have ever seen a more bogus NFL roster ranking in my 40 plus years following the NFL.

We can do a position by position comparison of the Packers and Cardinals rosters if you so choose.

I mean, if you need intimate knowledge of Green Bay's roster to identify stars, doesn't that tell you what you need to know? Green Bay was a playoff team last year; I think they're really good. But really only the top 30 or so players matter for each team.

Love the enthusiasm for your club. Welcome to the board. Are you a shareholder?

The Saints have stars?????

Kamara and Olave are real ones. On defense, Paulson Adebo is a real one, and Cameron Jordan is in the same Hall of Really Good class as Calais Campbell. Brian Breese looks like a dude.

 

[oaken1]

Not sure you have an intimate knowledge of Green Bay's roster. The 3 clowns ranking NFL rosters have never been near a Packers game or practice. They looked at rosters on paper and ranked them with absolute zero knowledge of said roster and or the players on said roster. I certainly don't think they looked at the current 90 man rosters of teams going into camp.

I don't think I have ever seen a more bogus NFL roster ranking in my 40 plus years following the NFL.

We can do a position by position comparison of the Packers and Cardinals rosters if you so choose.

You should leave him be. He at least has the delusion that the Pack is better than us at QB..we wouldnt want him to find out that they are inferior there as well.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Kamara and Olave are real ones. On defense, Paulson Adebo is a real one, and Cameron Jordan is in the same Hall of Really Good class as Calais Campbell. Brian Breese looks like a dude.

Actually you used the term “elite”. In no world is Olave elite.
Kamara had some great years but so did David Johnson. Neither are elite.

Cam Jordan has been top level though. Still, the reference has no merit.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Not sure you have an intimate knowledge of Green Bay's roster. The 3 clowns ranking NFL rosters have never been near a Packers game or practice. They looked at rosters on paper and ranked them with absolute zero knowledge of said roster and or the players on said roster. I certainly don't think they looked at the current 90 man rosters of teams going into camp.

I don't think I have ever seen a more bogus NFL roster ranking in my 40 plus years following the NFL.

We can do a position by position comparison of the Packers and Cardinals rosters if you so choose.

Do it @k9! Do it!

 

[AZCB34]

Not sure you have an intimate knowledge of Green Bay's roster. The 3 clowns ranking NFL rosters have never been near a Packers game or practice. They looked at rosters on paper and ranked them with absolute zero knowledge of said roster and or the players on said roster. I certainly don't think they looked at the current 90 man rosters of teams going into camp.

I don't think I have ever seen a more bogus NFL roster ranking in my 40 plus years following the NFL.

We can do a position by position comparison of the Packers and Cardinals rosters if you so choose.

Welcome to the board. I’ll take a brat, some deep fried cheese curds and an ice cold Badger State GameDay IPA

 

[PackerNation2025]

I mean, if you need intimate knowledge of Green Bay's roster to identify stars, doesn't that tell you what you need to know? Green Bay was a playoff team last year; I think they're really good. But really only the top 30 or so players matter for each team.

When it's obvious that people ranking rosters have zero clue about the rosters they are ranking, I have a problem with that.

You also kind of implying the Packers are bereft of talent, tells me you may not have a clue either;-)

What position you want to start with as we compare the Packers and Cardinals rosters?

Scared? Just kidding

 

[BooksOrangePlanet]

suspect af

 

[BACH]

I think that ranking is completely fair. Until we have seen the expected steps forward from Monti’s draftclasses, this is the right range IMO

 

[PackerNation2025]

suspect af

What you worried about bruh? You never had cross-team love? PackerNation in the house, roll out the red carpet. You got royalty up in here.
OneTeamOneNation
PackerNation!
RiseUp
RedSea

Let's Go!

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach