Hardest position to play in the NFL besides QB?

[RANGA+ 1,210]

Watching Doug Free play makes me believe the answer to this question is RT

[BwareDWare94 723]

Quarterback is not the toughest position to play. No way in Hell. Corner or OT is much more difficult.

[KempBolt 498]

I would argue for safety. They are expected to cover in a league that makes it very easy on passing attacks. And while corners have a tougher job in coverage, safeties are also asked to fill against the run and be physical with ball carriers. Hard job in this era of football. Corner is another valid choice.

[OakBlack 28]

Cornerback

[McTater 28]

1. Corner.

2. Qb.

3. Kicker/Punter

4. 3rd string Te

5. Tackle.

[BC 331]

Safety? All you do is sit back and watch the QB's eyes.

 

Corner back and Offensive tackle. Reasons being is because you have to counter act extremely quickly what the player you are matched up with does. Or if you are zoning from either position, you have to quickly react to whatever beast of nature happens to enter into your responsibility area. I played DE and lord knows we made it hard as fuck on those poor bastards trying to block us.

[Bucman 891]

 

Agreed on most except the 10x part. If it's 10x harder, than why do rookie CBs usually perform right away as opposed to most rookie WRs who historically struggle their rookie years?

 

Also, my whole point about going with the WR is because most NFL players make it to the NFL because they are athletic, and have good instincts. I'm almost talking exclusively the mental side. Just because most players in the NFL are superior physically. The only thing you guys countered my point with that is legit, is technique for CBs, which is a mental thing. And I agree with. But let's not act like WRs don't have to have route running technique either, otherwise you're gonna struggle hard getting open. The Jags used to have a whole WR core with trash route running technique.

Because you can help a CB out with where he plays (In terms of who he plays against, how far he plays off and what type of D he will play). A WR has to learn how to beat jams and learn the timing of his QB.

Edited June 29, 2013 by Bucman

[Crash 105]

I get the corner talk because they do have to cover athletic freaks but how has no one said offensive tackle? That's where you have the real freaks. Any week you could be blocking Von miller, JJ Watt, Suggs, dumervil or geno Atkins.

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Safety? All you do is sit back and watch the QB's eyes.

 

Corner back and Offensive tackle. Reasons being is because you have to counter act extremely quickly what the player you are matched up with does. Or if you are zoning from either position, you have to quickly react to whatever beast of nature happens to enter into your responsibility area. I played DE and lord knows we made it hard as fuck on those poor bastards trying to block us.

 

The free safety is the QB of the secondary... he makes all the calls, and lines guys up where they should be. Not exactly "sit back and read the QBs eyes." You also need elite anticipation (if you even lean the wrong way, that could be the difference between a TD, and an incompletion.) It's the most mentally demanding position of the secondary, and the mental aspect is what separates a lot of the best from the rest, being most guys are close to the same athletically (with rare occurrences of guys just being out of this world athletically compared to others and getting by on that.)

 

It seems as if there's a big difference of opinion based on two separate schools of thought: physical demands, and mental demands. I'm of the mental demands thinking, because I feel players in the NFL are closer to each other on the athletically gifted level. With the mental/instincts separating them more often. It takes both obviously, and like i stated before a freak athlete (like an AP, or an AJ Green etc) can put you over the top without the mental stuff too, but it's more rare IMO.

[KempBolt 498]

Safety? All you do is sit back and watch the QB's eyes.

 

Corner back and Offensive tackle. Reasons being is because you have to counter act extremely quickly what the player you are matched up with does. Or if you are zoning from either position, you have to quickly react to whatever beast of nature happens to enter into your responsibility area. I played DE and lord knows we made it hard as fuck on those poor bastards trying to block us.

 

Lol. That first line tells me all I need to know.

 

Carry on...

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Lol. That first line tells me all I need to know.

 

Carry on...

 

Had the audacity to neg me too I didn't even list FS as the hardest position either. I don't normally neg, ever, even If I think a post is stupid. But I had to make an exception here, because he obviously values rep :grinno: So I figure if it's a big deal to him, might as well hit him back where he holds value.

[Jackofalltrades 8]

I'll go with MLB to be somewhat contrarian.

[Turry 755]

I get the corner talk because they do have to cover athletic freaks but how has no one said offensive tackle? That's where you have the real freaks. Any week you could be blocking Von miller, JJ Watt, Suggs, dumervil or geno Atkins.

So you list Doom as a "freak" but yet he is expendable and makes the broncos better by him not being there? Odd logic.

Edited July 2, 2013 by monstersofthemidway

[DavethePanther 37]

Defensive tackle.

 

Without that pressure from the DT spot everyone one else has to work harder. You have to come in a learn on the fly. So much to learn against big crafty offensive linemen. How many DT rookies actually make an name for themselves in year 1. Outside of beast like Sapp and Suh.

[MartinC 6]

Quarterback is not the toughest position to play. No way in Hell. Corner or OT is much more difficult.

 

That depends on if you are looking at this from a physical or a mental perspective. Physically QB is far from the hardest position to play (assuming you have the basic arm talent). Mentally though QB is magnitudes of order harder to play than any other position. Some systems ask more than others of the QB but even in the most QB friendly system in an NFL context the responsibilities and reads a QB has to make per and post snap are orders of magnitude greater than any other position.

 

Not to forget the pressure to succeed and emphasis on the QB in terms of won/loss. We all talk about a QBs won lost record (wrongly IMO) just like a head coach - no one talks about how many games a LT won or lost.

[PURP 2]

Offensive Tackle and Cornerback is definitely up there on the list.

[HUMCALC 3]

Hi guys, new member here. It has to be the center. Besides having to block, like the rest of the OL, he also has to get the snap perfect every time, or the play is doomed

[lordnate 6]

There is no toughest position. The harder a position is, the more expected error there is expected to occur, which lowers the standard. You can make this argument across sports too. In MLB, a good batting average is anything above .300 or 30%. That is absolutely horrible, if you are talking free throws in the NBA. The degree of difficulty, changes the standards to balance out. You simply cannot find a player that bats .850 like you can find free throw shooters that make it over 85% of the time.

 

The only way to have a toughest, is to have a very specific definition of toughest. The toughest positions to make an NFL roster at, are the positions with the fewest roster spots. KR and PR would be your toughest positions then. You can also define toughest position as most physically demanding. I'd have to say RB is probably the toughest position in that case. RBs usually don't last as long as players in other positions, because they take so much punishment.

 

I think perceptions of toughest also have to do with ones self. Personally, I have felt that CB is probably the toughest position, but then again I'm built more like a lineman, so I've never had the talent to really cover anyone.

[KempBolt 498]

There is no toughest position. The harder a position is, the more expected error there is expected to occur, which lowers the standard. You can make this argument across sports too. In MLB, a good batting average is anything above .300 or 30%. That is absolutely horrible, if you are talking free throws in the NBA. The degree of difficulty, changes the standards to balance out. You simply cannot find a player that bats .850 like you can find free throw shooters that make it over 85% of the time.

 

The only way to have a toughest, is to have a very specific definition of toughest. The toughest positions to make an NFL roster at, are the positions with the fewest roster spots. KR and PR would be your toughest positions then. You can also define toughest position as most physically demanding. I'd have to say RB is probably the toughest position in that case. RBs usually don't last as long as players in other positions, because they take so much punishment.

 

I think perceptions of toughest also have to do with ones self. Personally, I have felt that CB is probably the toughest position, but then again I'm built more like a lineman, so I've never had the talent to really cover anyone.

 

Positional difficulty does lower the standard of success, but it doesn't make a given position easier per se.

 

Some positions are harder than others to achieve perfection in. The standard for "success" in corners is lower than the standard for "success" in quarterbacks because of positional challenges, but that doesn't change the fact that it's much harder to dominate as a corner than it is as a QB.

 

So I guess if the question was "Which is the hardest position to be successful in" I'd be inclined to agree with you. But as it is, I think there are some positions that are better answers than others.

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

I really don't think playing LT can be harder then outside CBs. If it wasn't for the mental aspect of the game, I'd say they have it harder then anyone else. Corners who play zone have it easier, but more and more teams are going heavy man now anyway.

[Dutch 874]

Corners who play zone have it easier, but more and more teams are going heavy man now anyway.

 

I don't know about that. Man coverage may be more challenging from a physical standpoint, but zone coverage concepts is definitely more mentally demanding. Both are difficult but in there own light.

Edited July 5, 2013 by dutchff7

[Deathevokation 1]

I gotta with CB. If your the #1 guy on the team then you face their best WR. You can hardly touch WR's because the rules are slanted in favor of the offense scoring points (cause that is what the TV audience loves and cause it sells) and flags are thrown almost arbitrarily for defensive pass interference - nothing like keeping the game close so the audience doesn't change the channel. Also, you can barely breathe on the QB when you finally get a shot and you can't hit him low cause you might look up his skirt in the process.

Edited July 6, 2013 by Deathevokation

[KempBolt 498]

I don't know about that. Man coverage may be more challenging from a physical standpoint, but zone coverage concepts is definitely more mentally demanding. Both are difficult but in there own light.

 

I thought your whole case for Revis > Sherman was that Revis plays man and that's harder?

[Dutch 874]

I thought your whole case for Revis > Sherman was that Revis plays man and that's harder?

 

Haha. Just didn't want zone being downplayed. But man is more physically demanding which is harder especially at the level that Revis is doing it. So yeah, I'm a hypocrite. Who isn't sometimes?