Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: ESPN Sports Science: Trent Richardson « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 3 4 5

MiltonMack21

User is on moderator watch listWatched
******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 8972
Offline
#60 : March 06, 2012, 08:01:44 PM

Trent makes no sense when we already have a very good back.
I agree. Trent would be a good pick in the lower half of the first round.. say to the Bengals or a team like the Patriots who can use him up and throw him away in 3-4 years.
lmao

So you honestly believe that Trent Richardson will be better than Adrian Peterson/Chris Johnson? Or are just so in love with the guy that you are willing to throw away a pick on him? I don't see him being a dynamic weapon in the NFL. Unless he can line up outside every other play, run go routes, run seam routes and score then he is not top 5 material when there are plenty of other needs on this team. We only need to go back to Carnell Williams.......
First and foremost, I'm a GATOR FAN. I have no "love" for ANY Alabama, Florida State, USF, LSU, and especially the worst of them all the U prospects w/o a bias. I do think he is going to be a top 3 back in the league based on his skill sets. He does everything well as a runner. There are 0 weaknesses in his game, none. He is the type to put a team on his back despite mediocre/average QB play as advertised with 1/3 of the total offense coming from him this past year.

You do realize all of that workload will catch up with him Larry Johnson style.. and he will hit a wall 3-4 years from now right? I mean.. if he is going to do that he should be top 3 in the league to be drafted at 5. But like I said, Dominik will be writing his own pink slip.


Detrimental

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5980
Offline
#61 : March 06, 2012, 08:05:39 PM

You do realize all of that workload will catch up with him Larry Johnson style.. and he will hit a wall 3-4 years from now right? I mean.. if he is going to do that he should be top 3 in the league to be drafted at 5. But like I said, Dominik will be writing his own pink slip.
You do realize, last year was the first year Richardson was the #1 back on his team? He has fewer carries coming into the league than Adrian Peterson did and AP missed like 4 games his junior year.

He has very little wear and tear on him right now so I'm confused where this "workload" will catch up to him, is coming from.........


MiltonMack21

User is on moderator watch listWatched
******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 8972
Offline
#62 : March 06, 2012, 08:10:50 PM

You do realize all of that workload will catch up with him Larry Johnson style.. and he will hit a wall 3-4 years from now right? I mean.. if he is going to do that he should be top 3 in the league to be drafted at 5. But like I said, Dominik will be writing his own pink slip.
You do realize, last year was the first year Richardson was the #1 back on his team? He has fewer carries coming into the league than Adrian Peterson did and AP missed like 4 games his junior year.

He has very little wear and tear on him right now so I'm confused where this "workload" will catch up to him, is coming from.........

You draft a back top 5 he needs to get at least 350 carries a year to earn being taken that high.


Ramonb

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1017
Offline
#63 : March 06, 2012, 08:13:02 PM

Let's compare who has "flashed more"...MW or Blount, its not even close.  Blount is a far far better RB then MW is a WR.  That's why Blackmon makes more sense then Richardson.
Their both #2 type players in their position. Until Blount puts up 10+ tds in a season, I'll beg to differ. Williams > Blount
The only player on the offensive side of the ball that played worth a darn over the last 2 years has been Blount.  Blounts only problem has been limited opportunities and poor coaching.  Give Blount 20 carries a game and he'll break 1400 yards.  Williams on the other hand has several problems, foremost among them is his consistent drops, and prefers to beg....beg for flags rather than fight for the ball.
The only arguments against Blount are his pass blocking and catching; however, without getting experience how can we tell if he can or cannot do these things...I remember when ppl said caddy couldn't catch.

Detrimental

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5980
Offline
#64 : March 06, 2012, 08:20:40 PM

You do realize all of that workload will catch up with him Larry Johnson style.. and he will hit a wall 3-4 years from now right? I mean.. if he is going to do that he should be top 3 in the league to be drafted at 5. But like I said, Dominik will be writing his own pink slip.
You do realize, last year was the first year Richardson was the #1 back on his team? He has fewer carries coming into the league than Adrian Peterson did and AP missed like 4 games his junior year.

He has very little wear and tear on him right now so I'm confused where this "workload" will catch up to him, is coming from.........

You draft a back top 5 he needs to get at least 350 carries a year to earn being taken that high.
Okay, and all signs point that he is capable. And the top backs 5 in the NFL don't average 350 carries a year. Go look at AP, Forte, Steven Jackson, Rice, and MJD they don't average 350 carries a season. Where did 350 come from?

Detrimental

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5980
Offline
#65 : March 06, 2012, 08:25:54 PM

The only player on the offensive side of the ball that played worth a darn over the last 2 years has been Blount.  Blounts only problem has been limited opportunities and poor coaching.  Give Blount 20 carries a game and he'll break 1400 yards.  Williams on the other hand has several problems, foremost among them is his consistent drops, and prefers to beg....beg for flags rather than fight for the ball.
The only arguments against Blount are his pass blocking and catching; however, without getting experience how can we tell if he can or cannot do these things...I remember when ppl said caddy couldn't catch.
Blount was one the top leaders in fumbles last year, but were quick to point out Williams dropsies? Interesting, I see that goes.

Blount can't pass block, can't hold onto the football, and as you said catching?(with someone covering him)

Williams can't beat press coverage and has concentration problems catching the ball.

I count 3 problems for Blount, and 2 for Williams. And yes, Blount can improve (catching+pass block) with experience just like Williams can with press coverage. Williams is better than Blount in my opinion because he doesn't need as much work. Neither are my favorite players as I'm calling for us to sign a true #1 WR and both slacked off in the off-season last year. Which is disappointing and why I'm calling for new starters at both positions.

Ramonb

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1017
Offline
#66 : March 06, 2012, 08:41:14 PM

The only player on the offensive side of the ball that played worth a darn over the last 2 years has been Blount.  Blounts only problem has been limited opportunities and poor coaching.  Give Blount 20 carries a game and he'll break 1400 yards.  Williams on the other hand has several problems, foremost among them is his consistent drops, and prefers to beg....beg for flags rather than fight for the ball.
The only arguments against Blount are his pass blocking and catching; however, without getting experience how can we tell if he can or cannot do these things...I remember when ppl said caddy couldn't catch.
Blount was one the top leaders in fumbles last year, but were quick to point out Williams dropsies? Interesting, I see that goes.

Blount can't pass block, can't hold onto the football, and as you said catching?(with someone covering him)

Williams can't beat press coverage and has concentration problems catching the ball.

I count 3 problems for Blount, and 2 for Williams. And yes, Blount can improve (catching+pass block) with experience just like Williams can with press coverage. Williams is better than Blount in my opinion because he doesn't need as much work. Neither are my favorite players as I'm calling for us to sign a true #1 WR and both slacked off in the off-season last year. Which is disappointing and why I'm calling for new starters at both positions.

I'm not sure.  I think Blount can be a beast.  I don't feel the same about Williams.  Imho best case scenario is nab Vjax and draft Claiborne and a speedster ala sproles in the draft.
: March 06, 2012, 08:43:31 PM Ramonb

GameTime

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 18808
Offline
#67 : March 07, 2012, 07:51:53 AM

You draft a back top 5 he needs to get at least 350 carries a year to earn being taken that high.

i dont understand this reasoning at all.

\"Lets put the O back in Country\"

Feel Real Good

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 26722
Online
#68 : March 07, 2012, 09:07:42 AM

You draft a back top 5 he needs to get at least 350 carries a year to earn being taken that high.

i dont understand this reasoning at all.
Not saying I agree with that complete statement, but the average NFL teams plays 1,000 snaps on offense and defense over a season, and in 2011 only two RB's played more than 800 snaps and a total of nine played more than 600 snaps. So if you're using a top 5 pick on a RB, you're not getting anything out of him for probably 400-500 snaps each season. It's hard to overcome being a 4-12 when a player who is supposed to help you the most is on the bench 40% of the game.

FRG is the most logical poster on this board.  You guys just don\'t like where the logical conclusions take you.

danimal09

****
Starter

Posts : 683
Offline
#69 : March 07, 2012, 09:20:55 AM

I just can't wrap my head around using such a high pick on a RB. I like Richardson just don't see the value there, especially since it is becoming more of a passing league every year. And don't give me the run sets-up the pass stuff either, it helps but is not necessary. So pass on TR at 5. 

Pteranodon

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1285
Offline
#70 : March 07, 2012, 09:57:00 AM

I just can't wrap my head around using such a high pick on a RB. I like Richardson just don't see the value there, especially since it is becoming more of a passing league every year. And don't give me the run sets-up the pass stuff either, it helps but is not necessary. So pass on TR at 5.

It's easy, RB's got some of the best highlight reels, and fans love highlight reels, isn't that basically how this thread started?

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21111
Offline
#71 : March 07, 2012, 10:02:04 AM

I just can't wrap my head around using such a high pick on a RB. I like Richardson just don't see the value there, especially since it is becoming more of a passing league every year. And don't give me the run sets-up the pass stuff either, it helps but is not necessary. So pass on TR at 5.

It's easy, RB's got some of the best highlight reels, and fans love highlight reels, isn't that basically how this thread started?

Well and toss in two other factros:

1. The myth that NFL running = NFL winning which is so untrue it isn't funny but the macho "get physical, pound the ball" lie is hard to kill.
2. FFL. It used to be a diktat that you take RB's early and often because they won your league. People don't separate reality from fantasy games and so the FFL feeds into myth #1 above.

Toss in that he's SEC player in SEC country along with highlight reels and there's no shock he's popular.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.
If you think Manziel is the best QB in this draft I can safely assume you are an idiot and will treat you as such.

Runole

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 8714
Offline
#72 : March 07, 2012, 05:12:58 PM

I have one question if a franchise rb has so little value how come so many were franchised last week?Lynch, Rice, Forte, and Foster certainly weren't given any chance to test the market.

yes it is a QB league but the way to keep your QB upright is to have a rb that can go inside, outside, block, catch the ball and doesn't have to ever be pulled.

Last season the Bucs had  golden opportunity to go after Sproles.    They can't afford another screw up .

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21111
Offline
#73 : March 07, 2012, 05:54:26 PM

I have one question if a franchise rb has so little value how come so many were franchised last week?Lynch, Rice, Forte, and Foster certainly weren't given any chance to test the market.

yes it is a QB league but the way to keep your QB upright is to have a rb that can go inside, outside, block, catch the ball and doesn't have to ever be pulled.

Last season the Bucs had  golden opportunity to go after Sproles.    They can't afford another screw up .

Sproles isn't really an RB anyway. He's more of a slot back and there's no correlation between QB health and RB's. Find the data to back that up.

The run game is a pervasive myth one that far too many teams in the NFL accept. NFL people are, for lack of a better term, dumb in a lot of decisions they make and deeply conservative in their processing for most teams.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.
If you think Manziel is the best QB in this draft I can safely assume you are an idiot and will treat you as such.

MiltonMack21

User is on moderator watch listWatched
******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 8972
Offline
#74 : March 07, 2012, 06:01:36 PM

You draft a back top 5 he needs to get at least 350 carries a year to earn being taken that high.

i dont understand this reasoning at all.

I am not surprised... it is another way of saying that Richardson would never live up to being a top 5 pick.

Page: 1 ... 3 4 5
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: ESPN Sports Science: Trent Richardson « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools