Why is Berrian getting so much love?

[ChileBear]

I would have absolutely no issue keeping a 4th RB, as opposed to a 2nd FB or 3rd TE. Frankly, you can have one player who fills the role of 3rd string TE and 2nd string FB. W/ that said, I simply am not sure I see us keeping 4 RBs.

I agree on this. A third TE seems to have little value when we all know the crap we've gone through at RB. Makes much more sense to carry 4 RBs with Wolfe and AP also being on STs. And that extra FB? How much does he get in? with so many leaks that need plugging, JA needs to take a closer look at value for the $ and roster spot.

[BearSox]

Guess you didn't see the realityof him turning that dump off pass into a conversion on a 3rd and 20+.

 

 

 

And to the argument that he can't "run inbetween the tackles" none of our rb's did that this year because the line sucked.

 

Gotta create holes to run inbetween the tackles....for any back not named Sanders, Payton, or Sayers.

 

You lose credibility when you list Sayers above Brown.

[azbearsfan]

You lose credibility when you list Sayers above Brown.

 

 

Why?

 

I wasn't talking about the Jim Brown type of back.

 

I was talking about the Barry Sanders type of back.

 

 

You lose credibility for posting random crap.

[BearSox]

Why?

 

 

Because when you think of great running backs, he should be one of the first 3 names you think of when talking about great running backs. Brown, Payton, or Sanders are by far the 3 best running backs to ever play the game and Sayers was no Jim Brown, Walter Payton, or Barry Sanders.

[azbearsfan]

Because when you think of great running backs, he should be one of the first 3 names you think of when talking about great running backs. Brown, Payton, or Sanders are by far the 3 best running backs to ever play the game and Sayers was no Jim Brown, Walter Payton, or Barry Sanders.

 

 

Really??? In YOUR opinion, not in mine. In my mind Sayers was better than all of them, but again that's debatable.

 

No reason to say I lose credibility. Its all a matter of preference, no right or wrong answer.

[BearSox]

Really??? In YOUR opinion, not in mine. In my mind Sayers was better than all of them, but again that's debatable.

 

No reason to say I lose credibility. Its all a matter of preference, no right or wrong answer.

yeah, that was bad wording... but seriously, Brown, Payton, and Sanders >>> Sayers

[nfoligno]

Dude, are you drunk?

 

One. The point made, and go back and re-read, was "creating". How much creating did Jim Brown do? He freaking ran people over. I am not saying that is all he did, but the point of AZ's post was a RB that creates. You know. No hole in the OL so, using cutting ability, shifting, spinning, etc., they create a hole where none previously was seen.

 

Are you going to try and say that was Jim Brown?

 

Two. You comment that AZ loses all credibility because he doesn't list Brown as a top 3 back (though that is not what he was actually doing) is a joke as well.

 

I think Payton, Sanders and Sayers were all better than Jim Brown. All three RBs did more w/ less, and against better competition. Until the end of his career, Payton was running behind shit OLs. I am not sure Sanders or Sayers ever really had a good OL. Jim Brown has a very good OL. Further, I would argue the defenses Payton and Sayers faced were better.

 

All arguments aside, who the best RBs are/were is 100% opinion. If someone puts Benson ahead of Brown, I can understand you talking about a loss of credibility, but to act like it is so cut and dry in putting Sayers ahead of Brown is laughable. Frankly, you lose credi when you so easily dismiss the opinions of others.

 

Final point. I live in Dallas, and many here would say you lose credibility for not having Emmitt Smith, who leads all RBs in total yards, on your list.

[kyyle23]

Dude, are you drunk?

 

One. The point made, and go back and re-read, was "creating". How much creating did Jim Brown do? He freaking ran people over. I am not saying that is all he did, but the point of AZ's post was a RB that creates. You know. No hole in the OL so, using cutting ability, shifting, spinning, etc., they create a hole where none previously was seen.

 

Are you going to try and say that was Jim Brown?

 

Two. You comment that AZ loses all credibility because he doesn't list Brown as a top 3 back (though that is not what he was actually doing) is a joke as well.

 

I think Payton, Sanders and Sayers were all better than Jim Brown. All three RBs did more w/ less, and against better competition. Until the end of his career, Payton was running behind shit OLs. I am not sure Sanders or Sayers ever really had a good OL. Jim Brown has a very good OL. Further, I would argue the defenses Payton and Sayers faced were better.

 

All arguments aside, who the best RBs are/were is 100% opinion. If someone puts Benson ahead of Brown, I can understand you talking about a loss of credibility, but to act like it is so cut and dry in putting Sayers ahead of Brown is laughable. Frankly, you lose credi when you so easily dismiss the opinions of others.

 

Final point. I live in Dallas, and many here would say you lose credibility for not having Emmitt Smith, who leads all RBs in total yards, on your list.

 

 

Its amazing that Sayers only had 7 years in the NFL, and 2 of those years he only played in 2 games.

[nfoligno]

And yet, as further evidence of his greatness, he is in the HOF. I do not believe there is another individual in the HOF w/ as little time as Sayers. I think 10 years is usually considered a minimum time of service before being considered for the HOF, but Sayers was so incredible, he gained membership regardless of his amount of experience.

[jason]

And yet, as further evidence of his greatness, he is in the HOF. I do not believe there is another individual in the HOF w/ as little time as Sayers. I think 10 years is usually considered a minimum time of service before being considered for the HOF, but Sayers was so incredible, he gained membership regardless of his amount of experience.

 

Game. Set. Match.

[jason]

When you try to reference one play to prove your point it shows theres a problem. The guy had one good play, and on that play he could have scored but he got caught from behind.

 

Wolfe may have been caught from behind, but the fact remains that he made the huge play, a play that Benson and AP probably don't make.

 

Wolfe is fast enough, definitely shifty enough, and strong enough to play RB splitting carries. If anything, he showed more potential than either Benson or AP this past year. He's not going to plow through guys, so the runs up the middle with a weak OL were a mistake. But it sure does seem like when he was given the ball in space, he made big moves and big plays.

[Connorbear]

Wolfe may have been caught from behind, but the fact remains that he made the huge play, a play that Benson and AP probably don't make.

 

Wolfe is fast enough, definitely shifty enough, and strong enough to play RB splitting carries. If anything, he showed more potential than either Benson or AP this past year. He's not going to plow through guys, so the runs up the middle with a weak OL were a mistake. But it sure does seem like when he was given the ball in space, he made big moves and big plays.

 

I agree - Wolfe showed potential. He also showed he could play special teams. I don't believe he is going anywhere.

 

Peace