Former NFL Quarterback [Chris Simms] Ranks Taysom Hill, Zach Wilson Among Top 40 QBs

I think Simms gets caught in "hot takes" on most other evaluations that aren't QB. I am not a Simms homer, because of the other aspects of "shock takes" and such, but he has not been bad at his evaluations for QB over the last few years. What I LIKE about his lists is he gives insight to WHY they are ranked. He doesn't go by sheer stats and puts them in order of W's and stats on a spreadsheet. I might not agree with some of his placements of players, but I can see where he came from. He gives a reason for each. Other people take his list and provide their own narrative and I think that gets lost since is taking away the "HOW and WHY". He goes by value to the team, intangibles, the team/system and his take on their progress, potential and such. No one liked his grade of 2020 for Brees, but when I read it, he did so based on not knowing how long he would be playing, declining arm strength, health, etc. He placed him at #15, which I thought was low, but it is factored in with who was ahead of them and how will they rate relative. Low and behold, Brees ended up being VERY injured, missed games and retired. He has had Brady lower than people expect, but there are factors and there is a method to his madness.

If he just stuck to QB and even WR analysis, I think he wouldn't get as much "push back" as he has had.

I agree that rookies really shouldn't be in that list, but if they are going to be playing, fair enough to try to assess where they could be and what there worth/value is in that team. He does move his narrative a bit with some players and one argument for one sometimes doesn't hold for another, but usually he seems to try to stay on his own point and model. Some is based on potential and inner workings of the team and some for what they actually mean to the team and how important they are in the W column. A game manager who doesn't make mistakes and doesn't LOSE with talent around them and a great organization vs a player who can almost WILL a team to win with meager talent around them will get the higher nod, even if worse stats and not as many W's....usually. It is not science and not all I agree with, but I can see where he is coming from on many of his projections or opinion.

As I said, I might not agree with all he says, but at least he gives some decent insight to WHY he ranked them a certain way and it is worth a read on all the picks due to that...not just read a copy/pasted list with another journalist adding their spin or other copy/pasted content around the list.

I know most just hate him regardless and don't like anything he says...LOL. I think he has made some pretty fair takes on QB's, even if I am leaning a different direction. ...and NO, it has nothing to do with him having Hill one spot over Winston...LOL.

When it comes to general sports analysis, he isn't my fave, but for QB's, he is definitely not the worst out there and provides insight from someone who played the position. Some QB's just played and played great, but there analysis doesn't go beyond a hard take with nothing to really go by or explanation...which I think Simms got caught doing with other aspects of football commentary in the past. Just stay in your wheelhouse Simms and let people just hate you for that...LOL.