Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Quote:
Originally Posted by -playmaker-
Gore has to prove he can stay healthy...he is the new Ronnie Brown
Mendenhall has been alright, before this year started no one thought Jerry went wrong in taking Felix before him though...I don't think he will ever be 'elite" status...he doesn't have the skill set that Charles has...
Charles has speed similiar to CJ and Peterson...he ran a 4.36
Mendy is a slow bruiser...
speed kills in the NFL...and I am convinced 40 times "mean something"...it just doesn't guarentee anything...
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Quote:
Originally Posted by -playmaker-
Gore has to prove he can stay healthy...he is the new Ronnie Brown
Gore was injury-prone in college. In the NFL, he has been remarkably durable. He's handled over 200 carries in each of the last five seasons (including over 300 in 2006). He's also only missed five games in the last five years.
When you are carrying that kind of work-load, averaging one game missed per season is remarkably good. His injury this season in the 12th week of the season will mark his shortest season in his six-year NFL career... Not too shabby.
Also, Gore >>> Brown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -playmaker-
Mendenhall has been alright, before this year started no one thought Jerry went wrong in taking Felix before him though...I don't think he will ever be 'elite" status...he doesn't have the skill set that Charles has...
Charles has speed similiar to CJ and Peterson...he ran a 4.36
Mendy is a slow bruiser...
Charles could never do what Mendenhall does, which is be an every-down back and carry a team for an entire game.
Speed does not = better.
Charles is explosive, but for a team that likes to play ball-control, plays in poor weather and wants an every-down back, Mendy is a much, much better fit than Charles. I like watching Jamaal play, but I think that Mendy is the better player.
Also, Mendenhall isn't exactly slow. He ran a f#cking 4.45 at the combine (and, more importantly, he looks fast on the field). He breaks long runs on the regular.
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMT
I don't necessarily disagree, but I find that he'll "never get 2000 yards" is a pretty ridiculous standard by which to make the argument.
I'm pretty sure Eric Clapton is a better guitarist than I am...though I'm pretty good. But "because I'll never have as many guitars as he does" isn't really a viable reason.
I made that statement because achieving 2000 yards for a running back is a really hard thing to do, and it takes a special player to get it.
Now don't take it as me saying Hillis isn't special. It is just that Johnson is more special.
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Gore is better than Ronnie IMO but I don't agree with the durable part...he hasn't played a full season since 06 and in case you missed the news he miss the rest of this season...yeah, carring the load bangs you up...AP gets his bruises too...just not every year
and I just think Charles is way better than Mendy...I guess we will just have to disagree on that one...only time will tell I guess, but yeah i shouldn't have called him 'slow"...although compared to Charles he might be...
also I think in many cases speed does make a player better...I guess we will just disagree on that one too...but if that was just your way of saying it isn't a "must" i understand...Emmitt Smith wasn't a burner but I'll be damned if he wouldn't have been "better" with 4.2 speed...
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Mendy ran a 4.45 at the NFL combine so he definitely has some speed and burst to break off the occasional long one (ex. game winner vs. ATL). He has great feet and vision and has been able to run consistently behind a pretty shitty and often injured offensive line all season.
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jailblazers7
Mendy ran a 4.45 at the NFL combine so he definitely has some speed and burst to break off the occasional long one (ex. game winner vs. ATL). He has great feet and vision and has been able to run consistently behind a pretty shitty and often injured offensive line all season.
I'm not saying he sucks (although it looked like he was going to be a bust his rookie year) I'm just not big on him...not yet anyway, rather have Charles
I think I have paid very close attention to Mendy's career givin that him and Felix were drafted right next to each other and the comparisons and "what ifs" where in Dallas for a while...still are now, suddenly Dallas fans are coming out and saying "Jerry is an idiot, he should have taken Mendy, I knew it all along"...
I shouldn't have called him slow, he isn't...just slower than Charles
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Quote:
Gore was injury-prone in college. In the NFL, he has been remarkably durable. He's handled over 200 carries in each of the last five seasons (including over 300 in 2006). He's also only missed five games in the last five years.
When you are carrying that kind of work-load, averaging one game missed per season is remarkably good. His injury this season in the 12th week of the season will mark his shortest season in his six-year NFL career... Not too shabby.
Also, Gore >>> Brown.
Exactly. Idk what Primetime was thinking when he made that remark.
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Well he was injured for pretty much his whole rookie season so we didn't really get a chance to see the type of player he was. He only played in 4 games and has 19 carries that year.
Last year he had 1100 yards and didn't even start the whole season. Him and Charles both had great finishes to last season (Charles went nuts tho). I get why people say Charles is the better player but I agree with RBA about how they are different players and Mendy is better suited to be an every down back. It's more about what the team is looking for and Mendy is a much better fit for our style and philosophy than Charles would be.
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Gore is generally reliable but as a past fantasy-owner of him I do get what primetime is saying. He doesn't miss that many games but he's always playing through some type of injury. I had him that year he missed all of training camp with a broken bone in his hand or whatever (or broken thumb or something? I forget) and all I heard was how he was going to fumble or be limited because of it. Played through it though.
Also I think there's a difference in 40 time speed and speed on the field, same in basketball with straight line speed and speed with the ball. Brian Westbrook in his prime was thought to be really fast but had a 4.57 40 time. That's actually .01 slower than Brandon Freakin Jacobs.
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Posterize246
Gore is generally reliable but as a past fantasy-owner of him I do get what primetime is saying. He doesn't miss that many games but he's always playing through some type of injury. I had him that year he missed all of training camp with a broken bone in his hand or whatever (or broken thumb or something? I forget) and all I heard was how he was going to fumble or be limited because of it. Played through it though.
Also I think there's a difference in 40 time speed and speed on the field, same in basketball with straight line speed and speed with the ball. Brian Westbrook in his prime was thought to be really fast but had a 4.57 40 time. That's actually .01 slower than Brandon Freakin Jacobs.
people with high 40 times can be much faster than their time suggests but just about everyone with a low 40 time IS ALSO fast on the feild...not a coincedence that CJ had the fastest 40 ever and is also super fast on the feild...can name many others like that too...Green/Deion/Bo/Ginn/AP/ect/ect...
I hate when people say "40 times don't mean anything"...BS, if that was true they wouldn't bother doing the shit...they DO mean something...they just don't promise anything...it doesn't mean they are going to be good, but it DOES mean they are going to be fast...
if someone can bench 2,000 lbs they are STRONG
if someone can run a 3.5 40 they are FAST
simple as that IMO...
I can't even think of someone that had a fast 40 but was actualy really slow on the feild...no one comes to mind unless they got injured or something...
but there are a few players that had low 40s that are faster on the feild...maybe they just ate something bad for lunch during the combine, who knows...
Re: Is the running back position the deepest It's ever been?
