Powerback

The score of a game is a stat. the fact you need 10 yards for a first down is stat.

Some people are not smart enough to understand 5th grade math so they are more likely to ignore stats.

What back would you prefer a guy who gets 5 yards every time he carries the ball or the guy who gets 4? Think hard about that for a while.

 

Eddie George played with the Titans for 8 seasons. In those 8 seasons, he had only one season in which he had less than 1,000 yards. (939 in 2001). In his first five seasons, he finished fifth, fifth, seventh, sixth, and third in rushing yards. LenDale White on the other hand had one 1,100 yard season, one 700 yard season, and two 200 yard seasons. Please tell me again how this is even close.

 

bammaboy is all about the ypc instead of the situational production.

In theory a guy that averaged 3.4 ypc would be the ideal back, as long as he always got 3.4 yards. Would always get the first down on third and 3, always end every drive with a TD, ect. But bammaboy would complain that the hypothetical 3.4 RB was not as good as an average NFL back that averaged 4 ypc.



One of the reasons football is the ultimate team sport. Really hard to isolate the individual performances from the team. Unlike say baseball, and basketball to a lesser degree, where individual performance is totally measurable on both O and D.

 

You have no proof of that at all you are just making that up. We have 3-4 teams with 330 lb guys like ngata playing end and 265-270 lb guys at OLB. The broncos drafted Robert Ayers a 272 lb end to play OLB.

Eddie's prime was over when players like Haynesworth, Henderson, Stroud, Wilfork and Hampton came into the league. Eddie's prime was over when julius Peppers came into the league and over when Mario Williams came into the league.

Your theory is BS!

And there is no reason for teams throwing a lot more now than then the rules have not changed.

 

Show me those situational stats. this is 2010 and you have access to the internet. Show me those stats.

Eddie George produced a first down in 18.2% of his runs.

Lendale White produced a first down in 19.7% of his carries.

How is Eddie the superior situational back?

I'm tired of people pulling some theory out of their anus just because it sounds good and coincides with their opinion. PROVE THE THEORY!

We have a poster who says that defenses were bigger and badder when eddie played. That's bullcrap! We have freaks today like Mario Williams who eddie never had to play against. It's bullcrap!

 

Defenses then and now..

I have done my homework on this and there is no difference at all between the average weight of front 7s then vs front 7s now.

There is a greater disparity today between DEs and Dts than there was then. Today you might have a 250 lb DE playing alongside a 330 lb Dt. In the 90s you had a 270 lb De playing alongside a 275 lb DT.

Today they look for specialization. A 250 lb speed guy to rush the passer and a 330 lb run stopper inside. In the 90s they just put their best 4 linemen out there.

There was obviously a disparity between systems just like today. The 99 Bucs averaged 267 upfront. The 99 Browns 275. Who would have been more difficult to run against? The Bucs obviously so size means nothing here.

The 99 Ram team that won the super bowl had 2 starting Dts that weighed less than Kevin Carter at DE. The 99 Rams averaged 265 lbs upfront.


More 3-4 teams means heavier defenses. There are more 3-4 teams today then in Eddie's day. The Ravens start a 285 lb OLB in Jarrett Johnson.

2000 ravens average weight-277.5

2009 ravens average weight 280.5

So tell me how defenses were so much bigger then?

 

reo isn't making that up. Notice the latest trend on offense. Teams are using more finesse backs to achieve the same workload guys of Eddies size were doing ten years ago. To lessen the wear and tear, teams are pushing two backs more than ever. Which is keeping them fresh. In an effort to counter that, defenses need smaller quicker guys. The big guys you're mentioning are simply "just big guys for their position" if they weren't getting the job done as OLB they'd be DE's, but they're special players who posses size and speed. And I'm sure you realize 3-4 OLB's need some size.

By the simple fact you're pulling out percentage stats shows stats are what the loser feeds on. Not saying you're a loser, but when we lost those six straight games, those who backed Fisher all pointed out stats, and not the events that took place or didn't.

 

Again just making stuff up!

Prove that! Prove it!

Being big has little to do with how durable or dependable a back is. Tiki Barber, Curtis Martin and Warrick Dunn were not big backs. Bettis, Watters and Dillon were bigger backs.

Stop posting theory and show me the facts!

You don't want facts because they destroy your point!

I'm losing respect for these counter arguments every time someone posts. your post is a load of contrived crap not based on any facts at all.