........In the end, the rosters are rarely a true rendering of the best players in the NFL.

 

Fan balloting ended Wednesday, and you might be excited that NFC North players received more votes than those of any other division. I'm not. Mostly I'm impressed with your tenacity at the virtual ballot boxes. The Green Bay Packers' Chad Clifton, who hasn't played in two months, was the leading vote-getter among tackles? Well done.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id...-bowl-questions

 

The point is that with 1/3 of the selection process subject to ballot box stuffing, and the other 2/3 by players and coaches voting before the season is over having only faced and studied film on 11 teams (roughly 1/3 of the league), the system is extremely flawed.

 

The top vote getting OT hasn't played in 2 months? That's proof that the system doesn't actually identify the best players and many get the honor based on reputation.

I think it has merit, even with its obvious flaws, but I also think people in general do know that pro bowls are often based partially on your reputation from last year(s).

 

I don't take it as indication that you were truly one of the 2-6 best in the NFL at your position as much as just that you deserve to be in the debate over it.

 

But I agree that sometimes we get a bit lazy and assign too much value to it. Our own QB is a pro bowler, albeit with only an 86 qb rating in 2008 (15 Qbs finished with a higher rating that year). And sure enough, it drove a lot of hype when he first came here. So was Jay one of the best 6 QBs in 2008? Almost surely not, but he probably did deserve to be in that conversation (based on his quality play not only that season but also during the previous 1.5 seaons...his whole career up to that point). So Jay's appearance was one of the better examples of a stretch, and yet at this point, he's looking like a longterm solution at QB for us. That's some validation for the pro bowl selection process, IMO.

 

So it's not unimportant...it's just that we have to keep it in perspective.

great points...

 

I think it has merit, even with its obvious flaws, but I also think people in general do know that pro bowls are often based partially on your reputation from last year(s).

 

I don't take it as indication that you were truly one of the 2-6 best in the NFL at your position as much as just that you deserve to be in the debate over it.

 

But I agree that sometimes we get a bit lazy and assign too much value to it. Our own QB is a pro bowler, albeit with only an 86 qb rating in 2008 (15 Qbs finished with a higher rating that year). And sure enough, it drove a lot of hype when he first came here. So was Jay one of the best 6 QBs in 2008? Almost surely not, but he probably did deserve to be in that conversation (based on his quality play not only that season but also during the previous 1.5 seaons...his whole career up to that point). So Jay's appearance was one of the better examples of a stretch, and yet at this point, he's looking like a longterm solution at QB for us. That's some validation for the pro bowl selection process, IMO.

 

So it's not unimportant...it's just that we have to keep it in perspective.

 

Pro Bowl is fluff. Players mostly need to be on successful teams to make the pro-bowl. Players start to get recognition when the media starts following the winning teams. I would guess they get 2/3 of it right. The other can be easily argued.

Your average NFL fan doesn't know enough about football to be allowed vote