You're doing it wrong. You're only supposed to start NFL topics if it makes your team look better than everyone else.
What about secondary as a whole??
That's a different question to be fair, and I am kind of stealing from NFL.com topics the past couple of days, but some teams on this list I would immediately get rid of with the Bills being the most extreme example.
Oh i agree, i just think they should rank the secondary as a whole.. Cuz it takes more than two corners to get the job done..
The problem with ranking secondaries as a whole is that there are too many variables. Usually a CB2 or CB3 getting hurt means putting on a street level player who is basically a traffic cone for most teams.
But then again, if you have a great pass rush so so players can be pretty good in said secondary..
I think for now Jeremy Lane (the guy who intercepted Brady in SB49 and then broke his arm on the return) will remain underrated if not anonymous. He's always played really well when healthy though, and this season could be where he gets his introduction. Even still, Sherman + random guy would be better to have than most of the duos that people are putting up on their top 10. It's like when you're playing ff and try to trade off 2 "good" players for one elite starter and a backup....you junk the backup after the deal anyway.
