Top 10 offensive matchup nightmares - ESPN Insider

[Schmoopy1000]

I think it has more to do with teams knowing they can't focus the pass rush to his side plus knowing in the run game he can just push 1-2 guys straight back. This means teams have to focus towards his side in the idea that the run game will do well running behind him yet many of times not want your best DE/LB towards his side as they won't make that great of an impact on the game like they would elsewhere. This is why I like Joe Thomas a bit more than Smith at this point as he is just a bit better in both categories in my opinion. Same with Alex Mack for the Browns in those two guys are both impressive in the run game and the pass game. Teams have to try and work their defense around that idea. To me then that makes them an offensive nightmare since teams do actually have to gameplan around the abilities of those two and even Smith as listed here on this list.

Championships are won in the trenches

 

[Caliskinsfan]

Championships are won in the trenches

Indeed they are. Double thumbs up.

 

[Uhsplit]

LOL I think you missed the point. Nobody objected to discussing "offensive matchup nightmares" outside those listed in the OP. Rather, there wasn't much enthusiasm about discussing how the players listed in the OP fared against a particular team!

I think you miss the big picture.
This is a football forum. My troublesome post was initiated on the general board. My post to cdum this morning was only to illustrate how easy it is to drift ever so slightly away from the intention of the OP.
Your position is in this case is it is ok to discuss who else should make this list but mentioning how any of them did against any team is taboo. Do I have that right?

 

[Uhsplit]

I apologize Uhsplit. I was discussing 2 guys who are considered top of their position in the NFL and honestly would take them as the 2 OL that are nightmares for any team. I did go on a bit about the Browns but hey they never get talked about other than Johnny Football these days so felt like they deserved a little bit of praise for the team they are forming around him and to have just a bit of discussion about them.


Sorry again though...anybody else you would want to add to the list of Offensive nightmares that is not on the list?

Apology not needed as this is merely a disagreement.

 

[TDs3nOut]

I think you miss the big picture.
This is a football forum. My troublesome post was initiated on the general board. My post to cdum this morning was only to illustrate how easy it is to drift ever so slightly away from the intention of the OP.
Your position is in this case is it is ok to discuss who else should make this list but mentioning how any of them did against any team is taboo. Do I have that right?

Eh, I think "taboo" is overstated. More like what was posted initially, namely, that your post aimed to steer the conversation away from "offensive matchup nightmares" and toward the Seattle defense. You certainly have the right to do that, but others also have the right to point that out (as several posters did). No big deal to me. Probably not worth further discussion.

 

[UK Cowboy]

They really are becoming that team you almost hope they have a little success because they keep having crap happen to them. I mean you look over the past what 15-20 years and they have had nothing but bad luck.

They actually are a talented team though. I said before all the coaching hires that if you base it on team alone and potential compared to all the other teams with coaching vacancies Cleveland really wasn't a bad choice. The FO is what made them a bad choice for anybody because they had become the new Raiders of the NFL.

Mack and Thomas definitely are arguably 2 of the best at their position. The defense is actually loaded from front to back with some decent talent. Just need to find a few weapons on offense and really they could be competing for a playoff spot. Too bad they had to use a draft pick on Johnny football hoping he will be the quarterback of the future.

I'll tell you what, they are strong on the OL and an outstanding D. They Karlos Dasby signing is gonna set their D off. They might flirt with .500, though I think 6-7 wins may top them out. Positive signs for sure though

 

[Broncos6482]

Guys, seriously. That's enough. If you can't be a part of the solution then just don't post.

KwitYerWhinin, stop whining. Your posts haven't been on topic at all either. You really aren't helping things, you are just stirring up the pot.

uhsplit, goes for all of us. It's past the time to stop this and post something constructive.

That's quite the change from your "just deal with it" attitude you had earlier.

As was mentioned by others, I do find it odd that Peyton Manning isn't on this list. Frankly, I can't imagine more of a nightmare for defensive coordinators.

 

[cdumler7]

That's quite the change from your "just deal with it" attitude you had earlier.

As was mentioned by others, I do find it odd that Peyton Manning isn't on this list. Frankly, I can't imagine more of a nightmare for defensive coordinators.

Seems like all the guys on this list are more geared towards what they physically bring to the field more than the actual top feared guys. If it was them got to think Brady, manning, and Rodgers are at the top of the list.

 

[WizardHawk]

I don't know about that. I still think it's harder to prepare for Harvin than the QB that is throwing to him. Just in the context of this article I wouldn't have Cam on that list. His arm, to me, isn't good enough to couple with his running and make him THAT big of a nightmare to set your D up for.

There is just more you can do to a really good QB than a really good WR. The ones on that list beat up defenses every time they are on the field. Even the greatest QB's come up against a D they can't handle.

 

[Broncos6482]

Seems like all the guys on this list are more geared towards what they physically bring to the field more than the actual top feared guys. If it was them got to think Brady, manning, and Rodgers are at the top of the list.

Yeah and I think that's crazy. To me, the most feared guys should be the ones who put up huge numbers consistently, regardless of how physically talented they are. Guys like Manning and Brady may not be the athletes some of those younger qb's are, but their experience and intelligence gives defenses fits. Seems like to me trying to come up with a gameplan to thwart Manning, Brady, and Rodgers would give any defensive coordinator nightmares.

 

[cdumler7]

I don't know about that. I still think it's harder to prepare for Harvin than the QB that is throwing to him. Just in the context of this article I wouldn't have Cam on that list. His arm, to me, isn't good enough to couple with his running and make him THAT big of a nightmare to set your D up for.

There is just more you can do to a really good QB than a really good WR. The ones on that list beat up defenses every time they are on the field. Even the greatest QB's come up against a D they can't handle.

All of these guys have games where they can be eliminated as well though. Calvin Johnson can beat most but you can design a gameplan to make somebody else on the team have to beat you. Everybody knows how to beat Brady and manning but rarely does it actually happen.

 

[Broncos6482]

I don't know about that. I still think it's harder to prepare for Harvin than the QB that is throwing to him. Just in the context of this article I wouldn't have Cam on that list. His arm, to me, isn't good enough to couple with his running and make him THAT big of a nightmare to set your D up for.

There is just more you can do to a really good QB than a really good WR. The ones on that list beat up defenses every time they are on the field. Even the greatest QB's come up against a D they can't handle.

You could probably same the same thing about a great player at any offensive position. Just looking at Calvin Johnson last season, he was basically shut down against the Vikings (9 targets, 4 receptions, 37 yards), the Browns (8 targets, 3 receptions, 25 yards), the Eagles (6 targets, 3 receptions, 52 yards), the Giants (4 targets, 3 receptions, 43 yards), and the Bears once (10 targets, 4 receptions, 44 yards, 1 touchdown).

I'd imagine you'd find similar games for the other guys on this list.

 

[cdumler7]

Yeah and I think that's crazy. To me, the most feared guys should be the ones who put up huge numbers consistently, regardless of how physically talented they are. Guys like Manning and Brady may not be the athletes some of those younger qb's are, but their experience and intelligence gives defenses fits. Seems like to me trying to come up with a gameplan to thwart Manning, Brady, and Rodgers would give any defensive coordinator nightmares.

They talk about that all the time in the week leading up to playing these guys they can't hardly sleep. Teams have years of game tape on them but they consistly win. That to me is fear. Knowing how to beat a guy yet still not being able to.

 

[WizardHawk]

That's the problem with these kinds of lists. You are left to debate who gets included and why some are excluded. The definition isn't universal and is highly subjective.

It's a game of 11 on 11 and defenses have to plan for all of the weapons they are going to face. It isn't just Peyton, but his protection and his favorite weapons/routes. It isn't just Harvin, but how he stretches out the defense leaving larger areas for Lynch to run in. And on like that with every team.

 

[cdumler7]

Right but the way this list is written the better way to title it is "most physically feared offensive players." If it was actual just players feared to play the most on offense I would bet over half the list would be quarterbacks because they have the ability to influence the game more than anybody.