Shutdown Corner - NFL

Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:21 pm EST

Counting down the worst teams in the NFL

The 2009 NFL season has been more about disparity than parity. This isn't because the top of the league is so good (really, is there any truly scary team out there?), but because the dregs of the league are so bad. This year's NFL isn't top-heavy, it's bottom-heavy. If it were a celebrity it'd be more Kim Kardashian than Christina Hendricks.

But of all the terrible teams, which is the worst? Shutdown Corner takes a look at the resumes of the "contenders" and whittles the list down to the most rotten squad in the NFL.

26. Oakland Raiders (2-6, -123 point differential): If we were making an All-Awful team, JaMarcus Russell(notes) would be the easy choice for starting quarterback (at least Derek Anderson(notes) once was good). But, despite the multiple blowout losses (the New York teams beat Oakland by a combined score of 82-7), the Raiders at least have a good win on their resume (vs. Philadelphia), which is more than any of these other teams can say.

27. Washington Redskins (2-5, -27 point differential): The only two wins to the Redskins credit have come against teams ranked lower on this list. And no other squad, with the exception of our "winner", has appeared to have thrown in the towel as quickly as the 'Skins. But, hey, at least fans of the team have a public forum in which to vent their frustration. Oh, wait ...

28. St. Louis Rams (1-7, -144 point differential): A full calendar year passed between victories for the Rams, who finally got a W yesterday in a battle of attrition against the lowly Lions. Twenty-four hours ago, Steve Spagnuolo's team would have been at the bottom of this list. Even now, though, it's tough to put them too much higher, particularly when the victory came despite James Butler(notes) being tackled for a safety following his retreat into the endzone on an interception return. Somewhere, Dan Orlovsky nodded in approval.

29. Kansas City Chiefs (1-6, -76 point differential): If we're looking at positives, the Chiefs have the fewest fumbles lost of any team in the NFL. But that's really about it. I don't think anyone will be surprised if Todd Haley pulls a Tom Cable in a few weeks.

30. Tampa Bay Buccaneers (0-7, -107 point differential): The Bucs rough start is particularly strange given the esteemed coaching pedigree of Raheem Morris.

31. Detroit Lions (1-6, -92 point differential): Remember after the Lions snapped that lengthy losing streak against the Redskins in week 3 and how everyone thought it was the start of bigger and better things for the team? Yeah, not so much.

And the worst team in the NFL:

32. Cleveland Browns (1-7, -131 point differential): In five of its eight games this year, Cleveland has scored six points or less. New England scored more points in one game (59) than the Browns have since Sept. 14 (58). Derek Anderson's completion percentage is six points lower than JaMarcus Russell. Joe Posnanski wondered if the hiring of Eric Mangini was the worst in the history of the NFL. Even Rolling Stone magazine is getting in its shots.

digg delicious
more

144 Comments

Post a Comment
  1. Mallard Davis
    1. Posted by Mallard Davis Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:43 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    The lack of a rookie salary cap is causing part of this mess. Teams that draft in the top ten have to put out $30 - $40 million for one player who may or may not be good and do not have the money to sign above average talent. Teams in the top ten would be better off trading down and getting more draft picks for the same money. Some of these lower round picks may pay off.
  2. Chubs
    2. Posted by Chubs Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:49 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    You ranked St. Louis higher than the Chiefs? You poser! I hope you don't get paid for this.....
  3. vanessa
    3. Posted by vanessa Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:49 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Hey raider fan, you made a top/bottom five list. ha ha ha.
  4. justin
    4. Posted by justin Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:52 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Thats a misconception Mallard... there IS in fact a rookie cap, but the way its applied is that the teams who pick at the top spend x% greater on one pick and then have to shelve the idea of bringing in a ton of non-drafted kids into early camp. The rookie cap works out to be a hard number that is like 13-15% (give or take, I don't honestly remember off hand) of the overall cap.
    Dont cry for the lousy teams, they're the ones who let 'signability' slip out of hand a LONG time ago. How many times have the Chiefs, Raiders, Lions, Bucs, Rams, and Browns picked in the top 10 this decade? Too many. You cant make rules to legislate against stupid management. The Steelers, Pats, Colts, and Chargers all seem to do well-to-excellent every year because of the front office staff as much as the talent on the field and sidelines.
  5. Dynamo38
    5. Posted by Dynamo38 Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:57 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Given the Browns volatility over the past few decades I think everyone is aware just how bad they are. However, at least they have 1 win this year. The worst team this year has to be the yuck-aneers. Still sporting a goose egg in the win column, they are VERY capable of becoming only the second team in the modern era to go 0-16.
    Discuss...
  6. Wiedy
    6. Posted by Wiedy Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:00 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Don’t be afraid to get the records correct (Skins are 2-5). Also, how can a team with -27 point differential be worse than one with a -123? The Skins offense is horrible but what are the Raiders? Zero cannot be less than zero and it’s pretty obvious that the Skins defense is far better than the Raiders, they have been competitive in every game this year.
    All this, of course, means nothing. But since “e-columnists” love to reflect the negative for the sake of being cute & funny, it’s deserving to point out how wrong they are.
  7. GPR
    7. Posted by GPR Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:07 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Florida Tuskers?
  8. busto
    8. Posted by busto Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:10 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Hell if I were Haley I would have killed some of my players a few weeks ago.
  9. Mallard Davis
    9. Posted by Mallard Davis Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:11 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Justin...that is the second part of the equation. Bad teams keep making bad draft choices. I don't have to look farther than my Raiders to see this. JaMarcus Russell, DHB, Mitchell, etc I still think there needs to be a hard number rookie salary cap rather than a percentage. If you look at the QB crop the year the Raisers took Russell, they would have been better off not taking a QB at all.
  10. rushmore
    10. Posted by rushmore Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:15 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Indeed, the Draft has created more lopsidedly bad teams in recent years... you can blame the lack of a rookie cap (I agree it is part of the problem), but you must also blame poor talent evaluation and/or development as well. Teams do not invest enough time in grooming their talent and they often don't know real talent from hype in the first place. I'm sure players like Michael Crabtree, Mark Sanchez, Reggie Bush have enough talent to play in the NFL, but are they really worth the premium that was paid to get them? Good teams thrive by making mid and late draft picks into superstars. They don't equate a salary number with talent level and often do not pay any premiums, particularly for new, unproven talent. There are exceptions... Peyton Manning was worth a number 1 draft pick. Teams that succeed know that they need a strong system first; personnel are selected because they fit into and will benefit from that system. It's great if your WR can run a 4.2, but if he can't catch or run the routes you need him to run, he is useless. Some teams will never learn that players can only be as good as the team they play for and the system they are in. It doesn't matter how freakishly athletic you are, if you're in Oakland or Cleveland or Detroit, you aren't going to make much of a difference. All three of these teams have great, athletic players (Asomugha, Joshua Cribbs, Calvin Johnson), but none of these teams win many games beacuse these guys are just guys surrounded by chaos and disfunction, not players in a defined and coherent system. Bad teams end up paying the premium again when the good teams get rid of players they know they can replace without busting their budget.
  11. Will
    11. Posted by Will Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:19 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Yeah, what #6 said. The difference in point differentials is key. Granted, the Skins might start getting blown out now that their schedule gets tougher.
  12. chris
    12. Posted by chris Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:20 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    I cry everytime my lions take the field because even though i have high hopes, i am prepared for the inevitable. for all the fans of the teams on the list i feel your pain. i will say one thing to defend my lions: at least we axed that train wreck matt millen. if stafford and johnson can stay healthy and we have a decent draft next year (no wide outs plz!!!), we maybe able to win a few more games.
  13. egglestonus
    13. Posted by egglestonus Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:28 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    MJD Talking bad about other teams isn't news. He only writes on commercial breaks from The View anyways. Seriously, is there a more estrogen fueled columnist on yahoo?
  14. sorryari6
    14. Posted by sorryari6 Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:40 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    the redskins are 2-5, dumbass...
  15. whiterabbit7785
    15. Posted by whiterabbit7785 Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:46 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    WOO! My Packers avoided the list!
  16. Damian C
    16. Posted by Damian C Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:49 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Hey vanessa, you should learn how to count. There are 7 teams on that list moron.
  17. Jordan
    17. Posted by Jordan Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:55 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Raheem Morris has an esteemed coaching pedigree??? This is his first head coaching job, EVER! Morris has as big a pedigree as Ryan Leaf
  18. cv
    18. Posted by cv Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:01 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    I hate the packers!!!!!!!!!! Good for Brett to come back to were he first started it all and whip them silly. Personally I never cared for the guy, but anything to bring down that whole obnoxious team and fans and those colors green and gold or yellow make me barf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh well the dumb ass that got rid of him is probably fired by now.
    Who cares about that team. My only concern is my Chicago Bears. GO BEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  19. unlpaintball
    19. Posted by unlpaintball Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:01 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    How exactly are the titans not worse than the Raiders? Do they not have 1 win?
  20. alex
    20. Posted by alex Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:07 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Hey Jordan. I think hes being sarcastic. Everyone knows Morris has no business being a head coach this early in his career
  21. zardpocleeb
    21. Posted by zardpocleeb Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:08 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Hey, my Browns are finally the best at something!
  22. vanessa
    22. Posted by vanessa Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:13 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Hey damian c.# 16 i am catholic, not mormon. ha ha
  23. Russel
    23. Posted by Russel Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:16 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Hey Jordan - I think (hope?) he was being sarcastic - if it makes a difference...
  24. RobertV
    24. Posted by RobertV Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:26 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Someone above associated this article with MJD. Wanted to point out that Chris Chase, not MJD, wrote this....
    I would put Tampa below Detroit, but its probably splitting hairs.......
    I thought Detroit was in the game against Pittsburgh and they do have a win....so....

Shutdown Corner

Add to My Yahoo! RSS

MJD

Shutdown Corner is an NFL blog edited by Matthew J. Darnell. Email him, and follow him on Twitter.

Teams

Customize to follow news and rumors on your favorite teams. [ Sign in ]

Related Photo Gallery

Y! Sports Blogs

Shutdown Corner Recent Readers