Skins in Top 10 for Scouts Inc. RB rankings

[MPCSkins]

The Skins getting some respect where it is deserved from Scouts Inc. when they rank runningbacks in the NFL. They put the skins third here.


http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/insider/news/story?id=2926897&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnfl %2finsider%2fnews%2fstory%3fid%3d2926897%26campaig n%3drss%26source%3dESPNHeadlines

If San Diego has the best one-two punch in the NFL, Washington isn't far behind. Starting RB Clinton Portis was limited to eight games last season because of a shoulder injury. That injury really opened the door for backup Ladell Betts. Betts finished the 2006 season with 1,154 yards on 245 carries. Betts, scheduled to be an unrestricted free agent after the 2006 season, re-signed with Washington. His return should make for a very good training camp battle with Portis. Depth-wise, the Redskins are excellent. They also signed former Chiefs and Jets RB Derrick Blaylockand have a scatback in Rock Cartwright. Fullback Mike Sellers is a very good special teams player, blocker and pass catcher. With young QB Jason Campbell at the controls, the Redskins will rely on this deep backfield to carry the offense.

[CarMike]

The only thing I disagree with them on is that part where they said we'll rely on the running game more with a young QB.

I think we'll see Campbell get plenty of pass plays called. Hopefully they'll be down field at that.

[helimech24]

The only thing I disagree with them on is that part where they said we'll rely on the running game more with a young QB.

I think we'll see Campbell get plenty of pass plays called. Hopefully they'll be down field at that.I think that really depends on how Lloyd and ARE do with the passing game. If those two struggle like last year, the article may be right on.

[culpeper]

the interesting thing to me is we are not a proven backfield...

the rating is given on the implied thought that CP and LB will both produce in this offense to the same heights they both saw individually. they have never produced to such levels as a tandem.

i dont disagree with the rating...its just i would not expect for both of our backs to get 1000 each. maybe 1200 and 600 is a better estimate? and thats just a good one two punch IMO...

[akhhorus]

the interesting thing to me is we are not a proven backfield...

Two 1000 yards backs isn't a proven backfield? Yes, they probably won't get that playing together in a season, but I can't think of any team who has 2 RB who's each gotten over 1000 yards in the last 2 seasons.

[culpeper]

Two 1000 yards backs isn't a proven backfield? Yes, they probably won't get that playing together in a season, but I can't think of any team who has 2 RB who's each gotten over 1000 yards in the last 2 seasons.

not together though. we are proven individually. thats why i didnt disagree with the #3 ranking. i just hope that we can use each player to their strengths and prove this ranking is correct.

[akhhorus]

not together though. we are proven individually. thats why i didnt disagree with the #3 ranking. i just hope that we can use each player to their strengths and prove this ranking is correct.

I don't think that should have anything to do with it. The criteria(and San Fran, KC, SD and Seattle's rankings prove this) appears to be that who has the best RB and the best backup situation-not who knows how to use them together properly. If the latter is the case, then the Saints would be the #1 team far and away.

Dallas btw, has no place on this top 10 list.

[culpeper]

[QUOTE=akhhorus;977047]I don't think that should have anything to do with it. The criteria(and San Fran, KC, SD and Seattle's rankings prove this) appears to be that who has the best RB and the best backup situation-not who knows how to use them together properly.

great point. i think i just dont agree with SI point of view. IMO it should be the two together in todays NFL

If the latter is the case, then the Saints would be the #1 team far and away.[/I][/B]

IMO they are the #1 any way you slice it.... but i agree with you here

Dallas btw, has no place on this top 10 list

i dont agree here. as hard as it is to say, they have a great one two punch. i think parcells used them incorrectly, but those are two very talented RBs.

[esmith1790]

I don't think that should have anything to do with it. The criteria(and San Fran, KC, SD and Seattle's rankings prove this) appears to be that who has the best RB and the best backup situation-not who knows how to use them together properly. If the latter is the case, then the Saints would be the #1 team far and away.

Dallas btw, has no place on this top 10 list.

please explain why Dallas has no place being in the top 10.

[skinfanjon]

[QUOTE]




i dont agree here. as hard as it is to say, they have a great one two punch. i think parcells used them incorrectly, but those are two very talented RBs.

You can't be talking about Julius Jones. I'm a Notre Dame fan, I've seen just about every game he's played since high school- there is nothing great about his game. Hes a decent option and semi-capable starter, but nothing close to a franchise running back. He'll look really good at times, but disappear just as quickly. The jury is still out on Barber, he was impressive at times last season, but I'm thinking he ends up in the same category as Jones, which means they should have no place on this list. Bottom 10, maybe.

[akhhorus]

i dont agree here. as hard as it is to say, they have a great one two punch. i think parcells used them incorrectly, but those are two very talented RBs.

Neither one is an established RB. Jones has had 1 1000 yard season(and actually wasn't that good last season) and Barber is still a project. They have no business being ahead of teams like Oakland(Rhodes, Bush, Jordan), Jets(Jones, Washington), Cincy(Johnson, Perry, Irons), Pittsburgh(Parker, Barlow, Hayes), Atlanta(Dunn, Norwood, Vick) or St Louis(Jackson, Davis, Leonard).

[akhhorus]

please explain why Dallas has no place being in the top 10.

http://hailredskins.com/vbforum/showpost.php?p=977056&postcount=11

Midlevel, but nowhere near top 10 in the NFL.

[skinfanjon]

please explain why Dallas has no place being in the top 10.

Basically because Jones is a very average back and Barber has yet to prove much of anything. Unless a back with a carer ypc of 4.0 deserves mentioning amongst the games finest.

[ac/DC_Fan]

please explain why Dallas has no place being in the top 10.

As much as I dislike Dallas, they are fair game for top 10. I think 3rd for us is about right. However, I think a strong argument can be made for #2. Very few teams have legitimate #1 quality RBs who have shown they can handle the load as recently as Portis and Betts have.

[akhhorus]

Basically because Jones is a very average back and Barber has yet to prove much of anything. Unless a back with a carer ypc of 4.0 deserves mentioning amongst the games finest.

Jones isn't a top 10 RB(or top 15) in the NFL. Barber isn't in the top 50. That alone pushes them down the list.

[skinfanjon]

Jones isn't a top 10 RB(or top 15) in the NFL. Barber isn't in the top 50. That alone pushes them down the list.

Exactly. Barber might still pan out, he was good enough last year to at least deserve an opportunity to see what he can do as the primary back, but for right now, no wayyy are they in the top ten, or top 15, as a unit.

[esmith1790]

so how does the production from the position account for then?

As i have seen from others comments on the rankings.

Is it total production or, as in the chiefs case, LJ and anyone else they suit up.

[Ibleedburgundy]

IMO, you need to have a true number one RB to be in the top ten and I don´t see how Minnesota is ranked ahead of NO. Dallas does not have a true #1 back. They have two Ladell Betts´s at best.

If this were my list I would have NO possibly ahead of the Skins and Jacksonville and definitely ahead of Minnie.

[culpeper]

Neither one is an established RB. Jones has had 1 1000 yard season(and actually wasn't that good last season) and Barber is still a project. They have no business being ahead of teams like Oakland(Rhodes, Bush, Jordan), Jets(Jones, Washington), Cincy(Johnson, Perry, Irons), Pittsburgh(Parker, Barlow, Hayes), Atlanta(Dunn, Norwood, Vick) or St Louis(Jackson, Davis, Leonard).

re-read my statement... they are 'talented'. i never said they are established. IMO you could say the same things about our backfield though. at this point in the season, speculation rules...

and also IMO st.louis, oakland, pittsburgh, have no business in the group. the rams have a solid starter and a rookie FB. the raiders....come on. and the steelers have a great Oline. i think you will see the running game struggle this year after the loss of Grimm.

[culpeper]

so how does the production from the position account for then?

As i have seen from others comments on the rankings.

Is it total production or, as in the chiefs case, LJ and anyone else they suit up.

i agree here. i think that most people take that first RB and automatically make them the top running teams in the game. IMO you have to account for TOTAL production, ie. the falcons.

overall i think SI interpretation is flawed in that, if you are going to include backups and FBs too, you have to consider how those players play TOGETHER also.... just my opinion

[skinfanjon]

re-read my statement... they are 'talented'. i never said they are established. IMO you could say the same things about our backfield though. at this point in the season, speculation rules...

and also IMO st.louis, oakland, pittsburgh, have no business in the group. the rams have a solid starter and a rookie FB. the raiders....come on. and the steelers have a great Oline. i think you will see the running game struggle this year after the loss of Grimm.

Yeah, I'm having a hard time with Oakland as well, but if KC is in the group then STL has to be as well. Pittsburgh is debatable IMO it depends on how muchvalue you place on having a solid starter. Parker was a top 10 back last year, and his backups are decent, so they deserve to be mentioned. I'd probably place them above Dallas, but not by much.

[esmith1790]

re-read my statement... they are 'talented'. i never said they are established. IMO you could say the same things about our backfield though. at this point in the season, speculation rules...

and also IMO st.louis, oakland, pittsburgh, have no business in the group. the rams have a solid starter and a rookie FB. the raiders....come on. and the steelers have a great Oline. i think you will see the running game struggle this year after the loss of Grimm.


I can agree with almost everyones points, but i guess we are looking at the list differently. If you ranked the production, yards and TDs for the teams top 2 backs the Boys would be higher then most think,

Also, there is somewhat of a factor for great OL, bad OL, great QB and bad QB play. It just depends on how you want to use them for making a point.

[culpeper]

i agree here. i think that most people take that first RB and automatically make them the top running teams in the game. IMO you have to account for TOTAL production, ie. the falcons.

overall i think SI interpretation is flawed in that, if you are going to include backups and FBs too, you have to consider how those players play TOGETHER also.... just my opinion

[skinfanjon]

I can agree with almost everyones points, but i guess we are looking at the list differently. If you ranked the production, yards and TDs for the teams top 2 backs the Boys would be higher then most think,

Also, there is somewhat of a factor for great OL, bad OL, great QB and bad QB play. It just depends on how you want to use them for making a point.

Yeah, its a pretty subjective argument. Just depends on what factors you are considering.

[akhhorus]

re-read my statement... they are 'talented'. i never said they are established. IMO you could say the same things about our backfield though. at this point in the season, speculation rules...

How can you say either Jones or barber are "talented"?

And lets compare backfields:
Washington: 8800 career yards, 61 TDs
Dallas: 4000ish career yards, 35 Tds

I don't think you can compare their backfield to the Skins in anyway, except they are all football players(or carbon based lifeforms).

and also IMO st.louis, oakland, pittsburgh, have no business in the group. the rams have a solid starter and a rookie FB.

Jackson had 2300 total yards and 20 TDs..last year. How is he just a "solid starter"?

the raiders....come on. and the steelers have a great Oline. i think you will see the running game struggle this year after the loss of Grimm.

I believe Dallas had more pro bowl OLmen last year than the Steelers(which is probably an outrage). The Raiders have more talent at RB than the Boys do and the Steelers have a top 12 starting RB.

[akhhorus]

i agree here. i think that most people take that first RB and automatically make them the top running teams in the game. IMO you have to account for TOTAL production, ie. the falcons.

overall i think SI interpretation is flawed in that, if you are going to include backups and FBs too, you have to consider how those players play TOGETHER also.... just my opinion

ESPN's list, not SI. And thats what I'm considering. Dallas has an okay starter, a unproven backup and nothing special at FB.

[RedSkinBrit]

Good to see the Redskins getting some raps for our stong RB .situation.Also i think that our strength on the ground will open more options for JC through the air.

[esmith1790]

i think rushing TDs say alot about the OL and the RBs.


Chargers LT 28 MT 2 = 30
Pats CD 13 LM 6 = 19
JAX FT 5 MJD 13 = 18
Boys JJ 4 MB 14 = 18
Chiefs LJ 17 MB 0 = 17
INDY JA 7 DR 5 = 12


i didnt list anymore but JJ/MB were productive and most teams would take that production from 1 player or 2 players as long as they get them.

[akhhorus]

i think rushing TDs say alot about the OL and the RBs.

Chargers LT 28 MT 2 = 30
Pats CD 13 LM 6 = 19
JAX FT 5 MJD 13 = 18
Boys JJ 4 MB 14 = 18
Chiefs LJ 17 MB 0 = 17
INDY JA 7 DR 5 = 12

i didnt list anymore but JJ/MB were productive and most teams would take that production from 1 player or 2 players as long as they get them.

So the Colts(at 1735 yards with a 3.5 YPC average 15 TDs) had a better rushing game than the Falcons(2939 yards, 5.5 YPC and 9 TDs) in 2006? This is major hairsplitting on your part.

[esmith1790]

So the Colts(at 1735 yards with a 3.5 YPC average 15 TDs) had a better rushing game than the Falcons(2939 yards, 5.5 YPC and 9 TDs) in 2006? This is major hairsplitting on your part.

Mike Vick skews their stats esp the yards, 1039 and 2 TDs. We just view the rankings differently. Yards are nice but putting the ball in the endonze is what i believe is the most important part.

[akhhorus]

Mike Vick skews their stats esp the yards, 1039 and 2 TDs.

Dunn and Norwood would still get them over 1800 yards(over 5.0 ypc roughly also).

We just view the rankings differently. Yards are nice but putting the ball in the endonze is what i believe is the most important part.

And maybe if a team wasn't scoring much overall, thats a valid point. But a team with a good short yardage back who scores a lot(see Marion Barber last year) doesn't make them a good rushing team(or them a good combo of Rbs). You can't say with a straight face that Jones and Barber are among the best backfields in the NFL. They're okay at best.

[JoeJacksonTaylor28]

i think rushing TDs say alot about the OL and the RBs.


Chargers LT 28 MT 2 = 30
Pats CD 13 LM 6 = 19
JAX FT 5 MJD 13 = 18
Boys JJ 4 MB 14 = 18
Chiefs LJ 17 MB 0 = 17
INDY JA 7 DR 5 = 12


i didnt list anymore but JJ/MB were productive and most teams would take that production from 1 player or 2 players as long as they get them.
It seems that you just looked for some stat that had the Girls at the top 5. That stat is far from "saying a lot" from the running game of a team

[esmith1790]

How can you say either Jones or barber are "talented"?

And lets compare backfields:
Washington: 8800 career yards, 61 TDs
Dallas: 4000ish career yards, 35 Tds

I don't think you can compare their backfield to the Skins in anyway, except they are all football players(or carbon based lifeforms).


Washington: CP 5 years, LB 5 years.
Dallas: JJ 3 years, MB 2 years.

So twice the number of years is twice the yardage. MB already has 10 more career rushing TDs 19 to Ladell's 9. CP is a great back and he is carrying Ladell. Based off Ladells career he almost is a 1 hit wonder.

[Skinz4lyfe]

IMO, Julius Jones is hit or miss so far in his career. Marion Barber is pretty good too. However, I have a hard time putting them in the top half of the league as a RB tandem as well. And in relation to Barber's # of TDs last year. I believe a lot of that has to do w/Dallas' passing game too. Weren't they ranked in the top 10? Nevertheless the Cowboys run game is solid at best but I'd say they're a bit inconsistent right now.

[esmith1790]

It seems that you just looked for some stat that had the Girls at the top 5. That stat is far from "saying a lot" from the running game of a team

Ok what stat do you want to use?

[Skinz4lyfe]

Washington: CP 5 years, LB 5 years.
Dallas: JJ 3 years, MB 2 years.

So twice the number of years is twice the yardage. MB already has 10 more career rushing TDs 19 to Ladell's 9. CP is a great back and he is carrying Ladell. Based off Ladells career he almost is a 1 hit wonder.

I will say that before last year Ladell was considered somewhat of a bust because he couldn't stay healthy enough to perform. Last year was the first year that he stayed healthy so he finally got to show what he is capable of.

[akhhorus]

Washington: CP 5 years, LB 5 years.
Dallas: JJ 3 years, MB 2 years.

So twice the number of years is twice the yardage. MB already has 10 more career rushing TDs 19 to Ladell's 9. CP is a great back and he is carrying Ladell. Based off Ladells career he almost is a 1 hit wonder.

Ladell only had more than 100 carries once in his career, but he's done more than Barber has in that one year. You can't seriously believe that Julius Jones is remotely close to Portis, do you?

And stop using that rushing TD stat crap. Thats extreme selective stat use.

[esmith1790]

Dunn and Norwood would still get them over 1800 yards(over 5.0 ypc roughly also).



And maybe if a team wasn't scoring much overall, thats a valid point. But a team with a good short yardage back who scores a lot(see Marion Barber last year) doesn't make them a good rushing team(or them a good combo of Rbs). You can't say with a straight face that Jones and Barber are among the best backfields in the NFL. They're okay at best.


The boys had a top 5 offense last year in regards to the number of yards p/game. They were top 4 in points p/game and they scored the 2nd most TDs in the NFL behind San Deigo. The, RB position must be doing something right because we had a QB during the season to a guy with no experience. So either the OL played great and justified thier Pro-bowlers or our Passing was great. I just dont see how all average can be top 5.

If we had seperate threads for all the rankings, there would be comments about the Boys being to high. Some group has to be ranked higher to produce an offense like last year.

[esmith1790]

Ladell only had more than 100 carries once in his career, but he's done more than Barber has in that one year. You can't seriously believe that Julius Jones is remotely close to Portis, do you?

And stop using that rushing TD stat crap. Thats extreme selective stat use.


Heck no i dont belive JJ is as good as CP, i just think CP is carrying Ladell more the people admit.

[akhhorus]

The boys had a top 5 offense last year in regards to the number of yards p/game. They were top 4 in points p/game and they scored the 2nd most TDs in the NFL behind San Deigo. The, RB position must be doing something right because we had a QB during the season to a guy with no experience. So either the OL played great and justified thier Pro-bowlers or our Passing was good. I just dont see how all average can be top 5.

5th in the NFL in passing offense(7th in INTs also). Very good, not great(3900ish yards passing). And no, that has to do with having two very good/great WRs and one of the top 5 TEs in the football, not the Qb or RBs.

If we had seperate threads for all the rankings, there would be comments about the Boys being to high. Some group has to be ranked higher to produce an offense like last year.

See above.

[akhhorus]

Heck no i dont belive JJ is as good as CP, i just think CP is carrying Ladell more the people admit.

I don't disagree with that, but even so: Portis alone is MUCH better than JJ and/or Barber.

[JoeJacksonTaylor28]

Ok what stat do you want to use?
How about rushing yards?

Atlanta - 2939
San Diego - 2578
Jacksonville - 2541
Washington - 2216
Tennessee - 2214

or yards/carry?

Atlanta - 5.5
Jacksonville - 5.0
San Diego - 4.9
SF - 4.9
Philadelphia - 4.8

All of those 7 teams are in the best 10 of any of those categories, and I don't think it's a coincidence that Atl, Jax, and SD are top 3 on both.

[esmith1790]

I don't disagree with that, but even so: Portis alone is MUCH better than JJ and/or Barber.

I would take Portis over both of them. When you look at other teams RB situation and wonder what kinda production they were getting.

i dont remember off the top of my head but since going back and looking at the stats, Betts only had 4 rushing TDs and TJ had 2 in the last 2 games.

I hope he can ride the OL to better TDs next year. CP had 3 more 7-4 in less games.

This might be JJ last year. If Cleveland sucks bad enough, maybe if we are really lucky get McFadden and just dump JJ.

[akhhorus]

I would take Portis over both of them. When you look at other teams RB situation and wonder what kinda production they were getting.

i dont remember off the top of my head but since going back and looking at the stats, Betts only had 4 rushing TDs and TJ had 2 in the last 2 games.

And passing Tds went up for the Skins after Betts took over for Portis.

This might be JJ last year. If Cleveland sucks bad enough, maybe if we are really lucky get McFadden and just dump JJ.

If think Jeruh wants McFadden so badly already that even if Cleveland doesn't suck enough to get him, they'll deal away players and their 2 firsts to get him #1.

[colkurtz]

The Portis / betts tandem means that they can carry this team - which greatly helps Campbell. They can use a run-centered offense and then allow Campbell to pass as needed or when the defense moves up for the run.

this is a great situation for Campbell and will allow him to develop without a lot of pressure to instantly perform or carry the team. This offense could really rock - especially if the defense can bring up their game.

[RedskinRyan]

cleveland under schottenheimer had 2 1000 yard rushers i think. denver almost did with tatum bell and mike anderson. the jags came pretty close last year. i cant believe denver, carolina, and pittsburgh arent on that list. larry johnson alone wouldnt put KC in the top 10, much less #2. san fran shouldnt be on that list either.

the redskins are justifiably ranked at #3. clinton portis is a well established running back, and ladell betts came up huge in the clutch last year.

[redskin_rich]

Rock Cartwright is a scatback? I don't think so.

With a healthy Portis, our rushing attack is going to be phenomenal. It's amazing that with all the injury problems, changes and transitioning that we had, we finished 4th in rushing. I can't wait to watch our offense this year.

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

Rock Cartwright is a scatback? I don't think so.

With a healthy Portis, our rushing attack is going to be phenomenal. It's amazing that with all the injury problems, changes and transitioning that we had, we finished 4th in rushing. I can't wait to watch our offense this year.
thank you. i was waiting for someone to pick that up. i love the amount of time and research these writers put into their articles. :p i too am excited about the offense this year. its going to be fun to watch.

[Skinz4lyfe]

Rock Cartwright is a scatback? I don't think so.

With a healthy Portis, our rushing attack is going to be phenomenal. It's amazing that with all the injury problems, changes and transitioning that we had, we finished 4th in rushing. I can't wait to watch our offense this year.

Yeah, that was kinda funny! Doesn't he remind you of a Joe Washington clone out there? LOL! J/k. Anyway, from 1-4 the Redskins arguably have the best RB depth in the league. I believe our Blaylock will make the team too leaving us w/4 servicable guys who have started at least 1 game in their careers.

[Skaggsrules]

Dallas' rushing attack isn't a top 10, Julius Jones is awful.....His last 11 games this past year, he only averaged more than 4 ypc once, only because he got a lucky 77-yard TD, which was also his only 100 yard game in that span, and 1 of 2 TD's...MB 3 is a talented back, I'll give him props, he should be their #1, but JJ has one big game and people think that offsets 8 games of below mediocrity....I'd take Rock Cartwright over Julius Jones, at least you would save a lot of money for the same level of production.

[culpeper]

[QUOTE=akhhorus;977082]How can you say either Jones or barber are "talented"?

come on man. theyre in the league. both had solid college careers and have shown flashes in the NFL. they are talented.

And lets compare backfields:
Washington: 8800 career yards, 61 TDs
Dallas: 4000ish career yards, 35 Tds

actually that looks better than the skins considering portis and betts have been playing for a longer period of time.

I don't think you can compare their backfield to the Skins in anyway, except they are all football players(or carbon based lifeforms).
cute...also they are playing the same game at the same position.

Jackson had 2300 total yards and 20 TDs..last year. How is he just a "solid starter"?
because he only did it for one year. if he repeats his proformance this year, IMO, he will then be one of the elite backs in this league. (referrence jamal lewis as the most recent. now look at him)

I believe Dallas had more pro bowl OLmen last year than the Steelers(which is probably an outrage).
yes i agree, absolute outrage. the steelers have one of the best lines in the league. or we may find out they had one of the best coaches in the league if they slip after grimm left

The Raiders have more talent at RB than the Boys do and the Steelers have a top 12 starting RB.
i dont agree that the raiders have a better backfield. and the steelers dont have anyone decent backing up parker. i would take the cowboys backfield over either of these teams any day of the week. (with the steelers line)

[culpeper]

Dallas' rushing attack isn't a top 10, Julius Jones is awful.....His last 11 games this past year, he only averaged more than 4 ypc once, only because he got a lucky 77-yard TD, which was also his only 100 yard game in that span, and 1 of 2 TD's...MB 3 is a talented back, I'll give him props, he should be their #1, but JJ has one big game and people think that offsets 8 games of below mediocrity....I'd take Rock Cartwright over Julius Jones, at least you would save a lot of money for the same level of production.

this is a horrible assesment of talent IMO.

[culpeper]

Ladell only had more than 100 carries once in his career, but he's done more than Barber has in that one year. You can't seriously believe that Julius Jones is remotely close to Portis, do you?

i agree here. i never said the cowgurls were better than the skins. i just said IMO they belong in the top 10...like at 10.

[culpeper]

The Raiders have more talent at RB than the Boys do and the Steelers have a top 12 starting RB

when i look at who the best backfields are in the NFL right now, IMO, you have to also ask yourself how good would the team be if that elite back, or just the #1 starter, went down with an injury?

in that respect i think that the redskins are top 3 easily. the steelers or raiders are not even in the top 15 IMO. Rhodes is a good RB? a rookie supplanted him last year, and now hes in oakland.

[Skaggsrules]

this is a horrible assesment of talent IMO.

It's a statement that says that Cartwright and Jones' ability to produce are pretty much the same, so why not take the cheaper, less overly-hyped player for the same production, and give the rock to MB 3, and put the cheaper equally effective RB behind him....If JJ and Rock came at the same price, I'd probably take JJ, but Rock is a heck of a lot cheaper, and brings a lot from a production standpoint

[RedskinRyan]

how do the steelers not belong? willie parker is becoming one of the best backs in the league, fast. najeh davenport can grind out those yards. then kevan barlow, who's had starting experience, and has rushed for over 1000 yards before. and verron hayes coming back from injury. thats a good 4 to be with.

[akhhorus]

come on man. theyre in the league. both had solid college careers and have shown flashes in the NFL. they are talented.

College careers don't matter. And only Jones has shown a flash or two. Barber hasn't.

actually that looks better than the skins considering portis and betts have been playing for a longer period of time.

Betts barely played until last year. Over 40% of his career carries were in 2006. So, its Portis and betts' 2006.

cute...also they are playing the same game at the same position.

zzzzz

because he only did it for one year. if he repeats his proformance this year, IMO, he will then be one of the elite backs in this league. (referrence jamal lewis as the most recent. now look at him)

Jackson had 1000 yards in 2005. There's no way you can say he's just a "solid starter". Lewis had 1100 yards last year and 2 1300 yard seasons before he had 2000 yards.

yes i agree, absolute outrage. the steelers have one of the best lines in the league. or we may find out they had one of the best coaches in the league if they slip after grimm left

They have a great OG in Faneca, the rest of their line is decent. I don't buy for a second that they're the reason Parker's had 2500 yards in 2005 and 2006.

i dont agree that the raiders have a better backfield. and the steelers dont have anyone decent backing up parker. i would take the cowboys backfield over either of these teams any day of the week. (with the steelers line)

Barlow is as good as Julius Jones. Parker is a budding star. Carolina is another team I'd take over Dallas.

when i look at who the best backfields are in the NFL right now, IMO, you have to also ask yourself how good would the team be if that elite back, or just the #1 starter, went down with an injury?

And Dallas doesn't have an elite back or a solid #1 starter.

in that respect i think that the redskins are top 3 easily. the steelers or raiders are not even in the top 15 IMO. Rhodes is a good RB? a rookie supplanted him last year, and now hes in oakland.

Jordan is at least as good as Julius Jones, and I'll take Rhodes and Bush over Barber anyday.

[dj_stouty]

The Vikings shouldn't even be on the list, let alone ahead of New Orleans.

[firehawk157]

come on man. theyre in the league. both had solid college careers and have shown flashes in the NFL. they are talented.

Both have shown flashes in the NFL, but the NFL is littered with players who had shown flashes and potential but in the end, were just plain inconsistent. Also college has no bearing on players entering their fourth (sorry, I was doing something else and got mixed up) seasons.



actually that looks better than the skins considering portis and betts have been playing for a longer period of time.

No freaking way man. Portis is much better and has been a feature back on a team (2004 and to an extent 2005) that had little to no offensive firepower. Teams stacked the box and he still produced. He's carried 2005 team on his back to win 5 in a row and make the playoffs. Can Jones or Barber say that?

IMO, Betts is right on the level that Barber/Jones are on. And right now, he has more upside. I mean backing somebody up for half the season and then producing 1100 yards in a half season of starting? Good lawd.

Anyways, you break it down and Portis is head and shoulders above the other 3 and then you can rack and stack the other 3 in a bunch of different ways to order them how you like.

because he only did it for one year. if he repeats his proformance this year, IMO, he will then be one of the elite backs in this league. (referrence jamal lewis as the most recent. now look at him)

Already addressed, but he's a young guy so you can't expect him to have 3 or 4 great seasons in a row. The question is, would you rather have Jackson or both Jones and Barber on your team?

i dont agree that the raiders have a better backfield. and the steelers dont have anyone decent backing up parker. i would take the cowboys backfield over either of these teams any day of the week. (with the steelers line)

Parker is head and shoulders better then Jones / Barber and Barlow has already proven he can be at least as productiveas Jones has been. Again, better then the boys backfield. I'm personally not sold on the Raiders backfield, but that might be because of a horrid O-line.

[culpeper]

It's a statement that says that Cartwright and Jones' ability to produce are pretty much the same, so why not take the cheaper, less overly-hyped player for the same production, and give the rock to MB 3, and put the cheaper equally effective RB behind him....If JJ and Rock came at the same price, I'd probably take JJ, but Rock is a heck of a lot cheaper, and brings a lot from a production standpoint

this is what i dont agree with. he had one good game rushing against the rams and some moments on special teams. the only reason he is still here is because he is a great locker room guy and hes willing to do anything to be a part of this team.

I LIKE ROCK!!! but at some point talent wins, ala blaylock. you cant just keep a guy because hes nice to work with...

[culpeper]

how do the steelers not belong? willie parker is becoming one of the best backs in the league, fast. najeh davenport can grind out those yards. then kevan barlow, who's had starting experience, and has rushed for over 1000 yards before. and verron hayes coming back from injury. thats a good 4 to be with.

i didnt mean they dont belong. i like parker, but if you put him on the cowboys roster, heck even our roster, i dont think he sees the field much. he works with that system. i did forget about barlow though. he could really help them if parker goes down. i just think they are a product of a great Oline, thats all. but kudos to you for pointing out barlow...

[firehawk157]

this is what i dont agree with. he had one good game rushing against the rams and some moments on special teams. the only reason he is still here is because he is a great locker room guy and hes willing to do anything to be a part of this team.

I LIKE ROCK!!! but at some point talent wins, ala blaylock. you cant just keep a guy because hes nice to work with...
I think he was trying to draw parallels between Jones and Rock in the fact that both have a good game or two and then goes into hibernation for the rest of the season.

I do believe that dollar for dollar, we get a lot more from Rock then Julius. Rock plays awesome teams, doesn't whine like Julius is doing now and has been shown to be mildly productive as a 3rd RB. Julius is a starting back and only is average and inconsistent.

[culpeper]

I think he was trying to draw parallels between Jones and Rock in the fact that both have a good game or two and then goes into hibernation for the rest of the season.

I do believe that dollar for dollar, we get a lot more from Rock then Julius. Rock plays awesome teams, doesn't whine like Julius is doing now and has been shown to be mildly productive as a 3rd RB. Julius is a starting back and only is average and inconsistent.

maybe the expectations are completely different for each JJ and rock. if rock does anything good, we jump for joy. if JJ does anything good everyone says he should be doing that as a first round pick...

[firehawk157]

maybe the expectations are completely different for each JJ and rock. if rock does anything good, we jump for joy. if JJ does anything good everyone says he should be doing that as a first round pick...
I agree with that, but like I said, dollar for dollar, Rock contributes more. Jones is supposed to produce and thus is a disappointment in the fact that he's only mildly productive and is getting paid first round money.

Rock is productive (not moreso, but comparably with the amount of chances he gets) and is not expected to be. He exceeds expectations and the level of production his contract dictates. Julius fails to meet his.

[culpeper]

[QUOTE=akhhorus;977327]College careers don't matter. And only Jones has shown a flash or two. Barber hasn't.

i think we have had trouble with him. and given the opportunity he could do what betts did for us last year....IMO. he has been splitting carries evenly with JJ.

Betts barely played until last year. Over 40% of his career carries were in 2006. So, its Portis and betts' 2006.

thats my point. betts hasnt done anything until last year. im on your side here if we are comparing dallas to the skins backfield.

zzzzz

how do i address this?

Jackson had 1000 yards in 2005. There's no way you can say he's just a "solid starter". Lewis had 1100 yards last year and 2 1300 yard seasons before he had 2000 yards.

i personally clasify an elite/star RB as a 1500+ yrd back in todays NFL. all the others are 'solid'. meaning they are good enough to get you where you need to go, but they wont win it for you... just my own definition i guess.


They have a great OG in Faneca, the rest of their line is decent. I don't buy for a second that they're the reason Parker's had 2500 yards in 2005 and 2006.

why not? they are a predominetly run team. and its exactly how jerome bettis resurrected his career. the steelers are a great running team...


Barlow is as good as Julius Jones. Parker is a budding star. Carolina is another team I'd take over Dallas.

i admit i completely forgot about barlow. panthers are a good pick too, but youre basing your pick on williams college career :rolleyes:

And Dallas doesn't have an elite back or a solid #1 starter.

i think JJ is. he just never got the chance with parcells.

Jordan is at least as good as Julius Jones, and I'll take Rhodes and Bush over Barber anyday.

well thats your preferrence. i would not...

[culpeper]

I agree with that, but like I said, dollar for dollar, Rock contributes more. Jones is supposed to produce and thus is a disappointment in the fact that he's only mildly productive and is getting paid first round money.

Rock is productive (not moreso, but comparably with the amount of chances he gets) and is not expected to be. He exceeds expectations and the level of production his contract dictates. Julius fails to meet his.


ill give you that...but player vs. player (not dollar for dollar), jones is a better back.

[culpeper]

No freaking way man. Portis is much better and has been a feature back on a team (2004 and to an extent 2005) that had little to no offensive firepower. Teams stacked the box and he still produced. He's carried 2005 team on his back to win 5 in a row and make the playoffs. Can Jones or Barber say that?

PLEASE dont hear me say that JJ and MB are better than CP and LB. thats is absurd... i just said that they belong in the top 10 on the list. nowhere close to the skins tho.

Anyways, you break it down and Portis is head and shoulders above the other 3 and then you can rack and stack the other 3 in a bunch of different ways to order them how you like.

again, i agree completely

Already addressed, but he's a young guy so you can't expect him to have 3 or 4 great seasons in a row. The question is, would you rather have Jackson or both Jones and Barber on your team?

playing with injuries OFF, jackson. with todays NFL, two capable backs for me.

Parker is head and shoulders better then Jones / Barber and Barlow has already proven he can be at least as productiveas Jones has been. Again, better then the boys backfield. I'm personally not sold on the Raiders backfield, but that might be because of a horrid O-line.

eeehhh. i dont think he is head and shoulders above them. but i agree he has produced more at this point. and i forgot about barlow so im changing my opinion of the steelers all together. they belong...

[akhhorus]

i think we have had trouble with him.

Marion barber: against the skins 3 games, 25 carries, 114 yards 1 TD(about 80 yards receiving). Try again.

and given the opportunity he could do what betts did for us last year

Counterfactual, not evidence.

....IMO. he has been splitting carries evenly with JJ.

2005 & 2006:
Julius Jones: 524 carries
Barber: 273 carries
Try again.

thats my point. betts hasnt done anything until last year. im on your side here if we are comparing dallas to the skins backfield.

And what has JJ done? He had his first 1000 yard season last year, same as Betts. How does a guy who's basically done as much as Betts at most and a guy who hasn't even done half of that deserve to be in the top backfields of the NFL?

i personally clasify an elite/star RB as a 1500+ yrd back in todays NFL. all the others are 'solid'. meaning they are good enough to get you where you need to go, but they wont win it for you... just my own definition i guess.

Then Jackson is an elite back, and Julius Jones is crap.

why not? they are a predominetly run team. and its exactly how jerome bettis resurrected his career. the steelers are a great running team...

Bettis hadn't gone over 1000 yards since 2001(and barely that year). The only Olineman he had back when he was going over 1000 regularly was Faneca. Parker's production has been amazing considering what their line is now compared to what it used to be.

ii admit i completely forgot about barlow. panthers are a good pick too, but youre basing your pick on williams college career :rolleyes:

Don't put words in my mouth, I didn't say anything about Williams' college career(and I dumped on Williams' college career during the build up to the draft last year). Williams had 500+ yards last year despite making 1 start. I'll take Foster and Williams over JJ and Barber any day of the week.

ii think JJ is. he just never got the chance with parcells.

Bull. 700+ carries and 35 starts in 3 seasons isn't a chance?

[culpeper]

[QUOTE=akhhorus;977391]Marion barber: against the skins 3 games, 25 carries, 114 yards 1 TD(about 80 yards receiving). Try again.

1 of those tds was the winning score and i remember a few 3rd down swing passes that broke our back. i wish you would just realize for once stats DONT tell the whole story sometimes...


Counterfactual, not evidence.

*sigh* once again, it is my opinion. BUT, MB did have a better YPC (4.8) than betts last year (4.7) and more TDs, if you want to go off stats. and thats with all those short yardage td runs he had. i still dont think MB is better. i just think, in the grand scheme of things, the cowboys backfield is a top 10 backfield as a whole....

2005 & 2006:
Julius Jones: 524 carries
Barber: 273 carries
Try again.

compared to the skins that is a lot better ratio between backs. dallas just split the time a little more. if JJ or MB got hurt last year, IMO, the remaining back would put up good numbers because they are both talented backs. if you dont think they are talented them you dont think LB is talented, because from a productions standpoint they are the same players....


And what has JJ done? He had his first 1000 yard season last year, same as Betts. How does a guy who's basically done as much as Betts at most and a guy who hasn't even done half of that deserve to be in the top backfields of the NFL?

JJ had :

04- 8gms, 197 carries, 819 yrds and 7tds (average that out over a full season):rolleyes:

05- 13gms 257 carries, 993 yrds 5tds

06- 16gms 267 carries, 1084yrds 4tds

when marion barber came in his carries never averaged a starting RBs average for the year. and considering the amount of games he has missed, it could be 3 straight years of 1000+ with less carries than a featured back gets in this league.


Then Jackson is an elite back, and Julius Jones is crap.
see above. i think jackson is only if he continues that play this year. last year was his first as the #1 guy.


Bettis hadn't gone over 1000 yards since 2001(and barely that year). The only Olineman he had back when he was going over 1000 regularly was Faneca. Parker's production has been amazing considering what their line is now compared to what it used to be.

great point. well see how well the line does this year though without grimm...


Don't put words in my mouth, I didn't say anything about Williams' college career(and I dumped on Williams' college career during the build up to the draft last year). Williams had 500+ yards last year despite making 1 start. I'll take Foster and Williams over JJ and Barber any day of the week.

i said you had a good point. BUT:

2006
JJ 267 car, 1084 yrds 4.1ypc
MB 135 car, 654 yrds 4.8ypc

DF 227car, 897 yrds 4.0ypc
DW 121 car, 501 yrds 4.0ypc

i dont agree...


Bull. 700+ carries and 35 starts in 3 seasons isn't a chance?
no. not as a starting RB. the starting RBs in this league average over 900 carries over that span. and the way he was used was not as a #1 back.

[culpeper]

ESPN's list, not SI. And thats what I'm considering. Dallas has an okay starter, a unproven backup and nothing special at FB.

BTW SI stands for scouts inc. i know it was espn...:cool:

[akhhorus]

1 of those tds was the winning score and i remember a few 3rd down swing passes that broke our back. i wish you would just realize for once stats DONT tell the whole story sometimes...

He only played in 1 game where the cowboys won(he did have a rushing TD) and considering that the game was 27-10 Cowboys, his TD wasn't the winning score(it became 17-3 when he scored). And a 'few 3rd down swing passes" are ridiculous since he didn't really produce against the skins.

*sigh* once again, it is my opinion. BUT, MB did have a better YPC (4.8) than betts last year (4.7) and more TDs

Selective stat use. Too bad Betts kills him in total yards in 2006(1500+ to 700).

if you want to go off stats. and thats with all those short yardage td runs he had. i still dont think MB is better. i just think, in the grand scheme of things, the cowboys backfield is a top 10 backfield as a whole....

And you can have your opinion. Don't let the fact that its unsupportable by "reality" stop you lol.

compared to the skins that is a lot better ratio between backs. dallas just split the time a little more.

Not really.

if JJ or MB got hurt last year, IMO, the remaining back would put up good numbers because they are both talented backs.

No, they aren't talented backs, and I don't think they put up good numbers even when healthy.

if you dont think they are talented them you dont think LB is talented, because from a productions standpoint they are the same players....

I never said I thought LB was talented. And he's still better than Barber(and its not close).

JJ had :

04- 8gms, 197 carries, 819 yrds and 7tds (average that out over a full season):rolleyes:

Don't use counterfactuals.

05- 13gms 257 carries, 993 yrds 5tds

06- 16gms 267 carries, 1084yrds 4tds

when marion barber came in his carries never averaged a starting RBs average for the year.

Julius Jones was 15th in the NFL in carries in both 2005 and 2006. Implying that he never got the carries of an "average" RB in the NFL is ridiculous.

and considering the amount of games he has missed, it could be 3 straight years of 1000+ with less carries than a featured back gets in this league.

Again: no counterfactuals.

see above. i think jackson is only if he continues that play this year. last year was his first as the #1 guy.

No, he had over 1000 yards in 2005 as the main guy.

2006
JJ 267 car, 1084 yrds 4.1ypc
MB 135 car, 654 yrds 4.8ypc

DF 227car, 897 yrds 4.0ypc
DW 121 car, 501 yrds 4.0ypc

i dont agree...

You're entitled to believe what you want, but if you were a coach and you wouldn't take Foster over either Jones or Barber, you're a fool. I would take Williams over either.

no. not as a starting RB. the starting RBs in this league average over 900 carries over that span. and the way he was used was not as a #1 back.

Not true. Only 10 Rbs had over 300 carries in each 2005 and 2006(9 in 2004). 240-250 is average.

[akhhorus]

BTW SI stands for scouts inc. i know it was espn...:cool:

For the rest of us who aren't versed in your personal vernacular(you know, the 6+ billion other people in the world), SI stands for Sports Illustrated.

[culpeper]

Selective stat use. Too bad Betts kills him in total yards in 2006(1500+ to 700).

says the king of selective stat use....240 car. to 135 of MB. YPC is the only way to compare the two since there is such a difference in overall touches...


And you can have your opinion. Don't let the fact that its unsupportable by "reality" stop you lol.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Not really.

this is not an answer.

No, they aren't talented backs, and I don't think they put up good numbers even when healthy.

"And you can have your opinion. Don't let the fact that its unsupportable by "reality" stop you lol"

I never said I thought LB was talented. And he's still better than Barber(and its not close).

i agree. im just saying that the dallas backfield has a place in the top ten...like at 10

Don't use counterfactuals.

why cuz the couterfactual police will get me? its not counterfactual anyways, its a legitament stat.

Julius Jones was 15th in the NFL in carries in both 2005 and 2006. Implying that he never got the carries of an "average" RB in the NFL is ridiculous.

great point. what i meant was if he were given the opportunity that the 'star' running backs in this league are given ie. those top 10 backs, he could produce the same. i said 'starter', my mistake...

Again: no counterfactuals.
i think its fair to assume you just dont have an answer....

No, he had over 1000 yards in 2005 as the main guy.

he split time with marshall faulk didnt he?

You're entitled to believe what you want, but if you were a coach and you wouldn't take Foster over either Jones or Barber, you're a fool. I would take Williams over either.
you are entitled to your opinion. i personally think foster is an underacheiver, and hes always hurt. i like williams though.

[culpeper]

For the rest of us who aren't versed in your personal vernacular(you know, the 6+ billion other people in the world), SI stands for Sports Illustrated.

if you applied the 'SI' to the conversation at hand it would make sense. but in any general convo i agree SI means sports illustrated.

i was just pointing out that you make comments that dont really have any reason other than to get under peoples skin...

[akhhorus]

says the king of selective stat use....240 car. to 135 of MB. YPC is the only way to compare the two since there is such a difference in overall touches...

So, by your inane logic, Michael Turner is a better player than LDT since he had a better YPC? And don't think the irony of you accusing me of selective stat use, then you doing that exact thing escaped me.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Thanks for giving up.

this is not an answer.

No, it is an answer. Just not the one you wanted. Dallas didn't split the time up remotely evenly between JJ and Barber.

"And you can have your opinion. Don't let the fact that its unsupportable by "reality" stop you lol"

Fine, show me any reality that they are good backs.

i agree. im just saying that the dallas backfield has a place in the top ten...like at 10

No way, no how.

why cuz the couterfactual police will get me? its not counterfactual anyways, its a legitament stat.

Potential stats in the past aren't legitimate stats. They're counterfactuals. I could potentially say that Patrick Ramsey would have been John Elway if he had just been given more starts, despite the crippling fact that reality doesn't support it.

great point. what i meant was if he were given the opportunity that the 'star' running backs in this league are given ie. those top 10 backs, he could produce the same. i said 'starter', my mistake...

Don't backtrack. You can't try and change your criteria because you turned out to be wrong.

i think its fair to assume you just dont have an answer....

No, thats your answer. Saying "well if this happened, then that would have happened" isn't evidence of anything, its a counterfactual. If you want to allow those, then I can spin all number of Rbs better than JJ and Barber with what they "might" have done.

he split time with marshall faulk didnt he?

254 carries for Jackson in 2005, 65 for Faulk. So no.

you are entitled to your opinion. i personally think foster is an underacheiver, and hes always hurt. i like williams though.

Foster hasn't started more than 5 games in a season before 2006 and he still had as good production as JJ did in 2005.

[akhhorus]

if you applied the 'SI' to the conversation at hand it would make sense. but in any general convo i agree SI means sports illustrated.

Again, if the link was from Scouts Inc, you may have a point. But you havent shown clear thinking and I don't want to assume that you have a clue.

i was just pointing out that you make comments that dont really have any reason other than to get under peoples skin...

I hate to break it to you, but you're not worth taking the time to irritate.

[culpeper]

Again, if the link was from Scouts Inc, you may have a point. But you havent shown clear thinking and I don't want to assume that you have a clue.

lol...ok

I hate to break it to you, but you're not worth taking the time to irritate.

lol...i heard a good quote yesterday...'if you dont respect your opponent, its not worth playing the game'...bye akh

[akhhorus]

lol...i heard a good quote yesterday...'if you dont respect your opponent, its not worth playing the game'...bye akh

Sounds a like a pretty lame sneaker commercial.

[culpeper]

Fine, show me any reality that they are good backs.

well, you think that carolina's backs are good. both of dallas's backs beat them in every major statistical catagory last season. please stop making me defend dallas because of your subjective opinions...

Potential stats in the past aren't legitimate stats. They're counterfactuals. I could potentially say that Patrick Ramsey would have been John Elway if he had just been given more starts, despite the crippling fact that reality doesn't support it.

and yet people still said that on speculation right? speculation is the offseason. this article is based on last years stats but speculating that certain players will perform. youre really splitting hairs here and its not really an argument...


No, thats your answer. Saying "well if this happened, then that would have happened" isn't evidence of anything, its a counterfactual. If you want to allow those, then I can spin all number of Rbs better than JJ and Barber with what they "might" have done.

people do this all the time. ive heard tons of people in my life say gale sayers was the greatest RB of all time. it doesnt make them wrong, they have a good statistical base and an opinion. thats all this is man, chill...

254 carries for Jackson in 2005, 65 for Faulk. So no.

ok, jacksons stats look glaringly similar to jones last season with that amount of carries... im not saying JJ is AS good, but hes just a slight downgrade IMO


Foster hasn't started more than 5 games in a season before 2006 and he still had as good production as JJ did in 2005.

ok youre proving my point... its ok akh, its just your opinion

[culpeper]

Sounds a like a pretty lame sneaker commercial.

lol, if you dont get it im not going to explain it to you...

[akhhorus]

well, you think that carolina's backs are good. both of dallas's backs beat them in every major statistical catagory last season. please stop making me defend dallas because of your subjective opinions...

I'm not making you do anything. And if you want to make this based on stats, then Dallas' backs really won't be top 10.

and yet people still said that on speculation right?

No, they said it on stupidity.

speculation is the offseason. this article is based on last years stats but speculating that certain players will perform. youre really splitting hairs here and its not really an argument...

How exactly am I splitting hairs here? This article is ridiculous on the face of it. It uses stats for some of its justifications and speculation for others. You can't selectively use one or the other without applying it to all.

people do this all the time. ive heard tons of people in my life say gale sayers was the greatest RB of all time. it doesnt make them wrong, they have a good statistical base and an opinion. thats all this is man, chill...

I'm perfectly calm. And just because people do it doesn't make it right.

ok, jacksons stats look glaringly similar to jones last season with that amount of carries... im not saying JJ is AS good, but hes just a slight downgrade IMO

The only difference is that Jackson had the 1500 rushing+800 receiving yards in 2006 on his resume also. JJ doesn't have that. I don't know how you can say JJ is in the same class as Jackson(unless you're a closet Cowboys fan).

ok youre proving my point... its ok akh, its just your opinion

No, that actually contradicts your stupidity..I mean point. Foster, before 06, had the opportunity same as Barber, but the production of JJ. That, if anything, destroys your point.

lol, if you dont get it im not going to explain it to you...

No, I get it, but its funny that you say that(and say "Bye"), then not do it.

[culpeper]

No, they said it on stupidity.

its not stupidity. its an uneducated bias opinion some people had...

How exactly am I splitting hairs here? This article is ridiculous on the face of it. It uses stats for some of its justifications and speculation for others. You can't selectively use one or the other without applying it to all.

for the sake of not writting a novel here...nothing in life is black and white, there is grey everywhere. especially when you are talking sports....this guy is being paid by espn, its entertainment, not right and wrong


I'm perfectly calm. And just because people do it doesn't make it right.
and you are the one to say its right or not? remember that high horse thing? this is entertainment. if we were arguing political issues i could understand your hard stance on all your views...dont overestimate your worth or take yourself too seriously AKH...

The only difference is that Jackson had the 1500 rushing+800 receiving yards in 2006 on his resume also. JJ doesn't have that. I don't know how you can say JJ is in the same class as Jackson(unless you're a closet Cowboys fan).

lol i know JJ isnt jackson. i never put them in the same class, dont put words in my mouth. i called him a slight downgrade...

wow, the dreaded closet cowboys fan putdown. that used to work in 5th grade. i see right through you AKH!!! lol :dance:


No, that actually contradicts your stupidity..I mean point. Foster, before 06, had the opportunity same as Barber, but the production of JJ. That, if anything, destroys your point.

classic AKH. youre the only one here that calls names in an indirect way...smooth, er, uh... cowardly...

foster had 70 more carries than MB, and 50 less than JJ. your point holds no weight with including MB. and lets just stick to the most recent events anyways, the panthers got drummed in stats. if you want to base this off stats you are wrong that the panthers are better. but 'in reality' its more than just stats (remember grey area). so im not going to say your opinion is wrong, i just have a different opinion. thats one of the differences between me and you...an open mind...

No, I get it, but its funny that you say that(and say "Bye"), then not do it.
i didnt see your previous post before i wrote that. also, call me undisciplined, i have a hard time with not talking to you. i miss you man!!! *repeat above while grinding teeth*

[akhhorus]

its not stupidity. its an uneducated bias opinion some people had...

No, its just stupidity.

for the sake of not writting a novel here...nothing in life is black and white, there is grey everywhere. especially when you are talking sports....this guy is being paid by espn, its entertainment, not right and wrong

This has nothing to do with what I said. I said that the author of the piece uses differing qualifications for his(or their) judgments with no consistency. QED, its hard to take it seriously.

and you are the one to say its right or not? remember that high horse thing? this is entertainment. if we were arguing political issues i could understand your hard stance on all your views...dont overestimate your worth or take yourself too seriously AKH...

I'm not taking my self too serious or overestimating my worth. There's "evidence" and then there's not. Counterfactuals are not evidence. And no matter how many idiots use them, doesn't make them right to use or valid.

lol i know JJ isnt jackson. i never put them in the same class, dont put words in my mouth. i called him a slight downgrade...

Fine, how is he a "slight" downgrade? Jackson has nearly twice the total yards than JJ has in 2005 and 2006.

wow, the dreaded closet cowboys fan putdown. that used to work in 5th grade. i see right through you AKH!!! lol :dance:

I'm not the one defending the Boys with the zeal of one of their fans.

classic AKH. youre the only one here that calls names in an indirect way...smooth, er, uh... cowardly...

I didn't call you any name, I called your views one.

foster had 70 more carries than MB, and 50 less than JJ. your point holds no weight with including MB.

huh? Foster had 50 less carries than JJ in 05, but only 130 less yards(and 7 less starts). Foster also had 340 more yards in 70 more carries than barber. Anyway you slice it, Foster was the better RB than either.

and lets just stick to the most recent events anyways, the panthers got drummed in stats. if you want to base this off stats you are wrong that the panthers are better. but 'in reality' its more than just stats (remember grey area). so im not going to say your opinion is wrong, i just have a different opinion. thats one of the differences between me and you...an open mind...

lol, you're claiming to have an open mind? Do you actually read what you write?

i didnt see your previous post before i wrote that. also, call me undisciplined, i have a hard time with not talking to you. i miss you man!!! *repeat above while grinding teeth*

Then don't write it, you become a bigger joke when you write that.

[Patrick]

Alright guys (Akh and Culpeper) you two have pretty much dominated this thread (over 50%). Maybe your discussion should be continued with PMs.

[culpeper]

[QUOTE=akhhorus;978102]No, its just stupidity.

:rolleyes:

This has nothing to do with what I said. I said that the author of the piece uses differing qualifications for his(or their) judgments with no consistency. QED, its hard to take it seriously.

then why comment?

I'm not taking my self too serious or overestimating my worth. There's "evidence" and then there's not. Counterfactuals are not evidence. And no matter how many idiots use them, doesn't make them right to use or valid.

computer club, computer club, computer club....

Fine, how is he a "slight" downgrade? Jackson has nearly twice the total yards than JJ has in 2005 and 2006.

JJ is talented enough IMO to do those things given the opportunity. not quite to that lvel, but hes a solid starter in this league

I'm not the one defending the Boys with the zeal of one of their fans.

im more fighting you than defending the cowboys

I didn't call you any name, I called your views one.

:awesomewo

huh? Foster had 50 less carries than JJ in 05, but only 130 less yards(and 7 less starts). Foster also had 340 more yards in 70 more carries than barber. Anyway you slice it, Foster was the better RB than either.
and what happened in 06?

lol, you're claiming to have an open mind? Do you actually read what you write?

do you actually read what you spin?

Then don't write it, you become a bigger joke when you write that.

somebody please achive this thread...i cant stop myself. if you have any more to say lets take it to PM....again....

[akhhorus]

then why comment?

Because people will take anything seriously, especially from a lame source like ESPN.

computer club, computer club, computer club....

What does it have anything to do with computers? Counterfactuals are a basic concept in logical argument.


JJ is talented enough IMO to do those things given the opportunity. not quite to that lvel, but hes a solid starter in this league

Jones only has 80 less carries than Jackson has in 2005 and 06 combined. He's shown how good he is.

im more fighting you than defending the cowboys

Keep dreaming there. So either you're just full of crap and are trolling(which is frowned upon here), or defending the cowboys. Take your pick.

and what happened in 06?

Foster had 40 less carries and 190 less yards. He's still better than Jones anyways you slice it.

do you actually read what you spin?

Thanks for the non-answer.

[culpeper]

Keep dreaming there. So either you're just full of crap and are trolling(which is frowned upon here), or defending the cowboys. Take your pick.

actually its just you. you just sit and wait to pick on someone, even when youre really arguing the same point but in a different way. and its not just me you do that with. go look through all my posts if you like. then let me know if im 'trolling'. and if i am let me know how you would like me to write your excellency...

Thanks for the non-answer.
:blah::blah:

when your comment warrants an answer i will give you one. take it to PM if you have anything else to say please...

[akhhorus]

actually its just you. you just sit and wait to pick on someone

Not at all. You overestimate your worth..again.

even when youre really arguing the same point but in a different way. and its not just me you do that with. go look through all my posts if you like. then let me know if im 'trolling'.

You have and are. You said that you've been just "fighting" with me, thats definition of trolling. I'm trying to argue the facts, you-in your own words-are just trying to pick a fight.

and if i am let me know how you would like me to write your excellency...

I would, but I doubt you would be able to understand basic concepts. In fact, I know you're incapable of understanding basic concepts based on your postings.

:blah::blah:

when your comment warrants an answer i will give you one. take it to PM if you have anything else to say please...

Its funny that you responded to these, and not to the actual argument part. I guess you can't anymore?

[Patrick]

Well I tried to suggest doing through PM you guys.
Thread Locked