Avernus Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 Mike Bell averages 5 YPC his 1st drive and gets a TD... this drive, Tatum Bell gets a 9 yd run and 2 for 0....this is typical for him with Ron Dayne and his turf toe...I think the situation is becoming more clear... tatum Bell is notorious for his large gains and then doing nothing after that....he's pretty inconsistent... Mike Bell looks to be a steadier back who can get some pretty nice gains once he gets more into a rhythm... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raider.Nation Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 This is seems to be true, especially after tonight. But what do we make of this Damien Nash situation? Does he have any value as a backup to the Bell boys? Or does Cobbs? Or does Dayne? Currently I own both Bells, and Dayne. Should I pickup Nash for the $1 it's gonna cost me?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 this drive, Tatum Bell gets a 9 yd run and 2 for 0....this is typical for him tatum Bell is notorious for his large gains and then doing nothing after that....he's pretty inconsistent... i think you're reading too much into a couple carries in a preseason game. there were simply no holes at all on those two no-gainers. that said, mike bell looked the part of a starting NFL RB tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 This is seems to be true, especially after tonight. But what do we make of this Damien Nash situation? Does he have any value as a backup to the Bell boys? Or does Cobbs? Or does Dayne? Currently I own both Bells, and Dayne. Should I pickup Nash for the $1 it's gonna cost me?!? OMG .. get rid of your Denver running backs while you can before you are shaninized ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XFlash Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 Maybe he has the Power of Greyskull. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 20, 2006 Author Share Posted August 20, 2006 i think you're reading too much into a couple carries in a preseason game. there were simply no holes at all on those two no-gainers. that said, mike bell looked the part of a starting NFL RB tonight. no I'm not... Dayne has turf toe...scratch him... Tatum Bell has been doing what he's done last year and Skeletor obviously doesn't like this... Mike Bell has been more consistent...even if it's pre-season... behind that line, if Bell continues to do what he's done the past 2 years...then he's nothing more than an explosive change of pace back.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 20, 2006 Author Share Posted August 20, 2006 OMG .. get rid of your Denver running backs while you can before you are shaninized ... ahaha I've had Portis and Droughns in 2 of my recent championship runs... I've never really been burned by a Denver back yet as they are never drafted as my #1 or #2.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 ahaha I've had Portis and Droughns in 2 of my recent championship runs... I've never really been burned by a Denver back yet as they are never drafted as my #1 or #2.. This is key. Everyone dogs on Denver RBs because of Shanny's whimsical ways, but they are always intriguing because Denver seems to always have someone that comes up big. Don't count on them as a #1 or #2, draft them in the middle rounds and enjoy your run to the playoffs. If you pick the right one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 This is key. Everyone dogs on Denver RBs because of Shanny's whimsical ways, but they are always intriguing because Denver seems to always have someone that comes up big. Don't count on them as a #1 or #2, draft them in the middle rounds and enjoy your run to the playoffs. If you pick the right one. I absolutely agree here...a Denver RB has always equated to a successful FF season for me. I rode TD to a championship and Portis and Mike Anderson to two seconds and another title. You know what you're getting from them as long as -- and here's the caveat -- you have the right one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Unless he completely steps on his dick next week, Mike Bell is the starting RB in DEN for the opening week. Once a RB has that spot, unless he gets injured he's extremely difficult to dislodge. That T Bell showed his homerun ability followed by nothing in following runs is exactly right, and is part of the reason Shanahan doesn't consider him a #1 RB. The other reason is the way his ypc declines severely once he gets 10 to 12 carries into a game. Tatum Bell over his 2 year career has gained 2 yds or less on 50% of his carries. If Shanahan uses T Bell as his featured RB, he'll get an occassional big play, but what he'll get a lot more of is 2nd/3rd & longs, and with a QB like Plummer, that's the death of the offense. Shanahan likes to grind teams into the turf, which means he needs consistent 3 to 4 yard runs on 1st & 2nd down. T Bell can't get him that - he doesn't run through trash well at all & is dropped pretty easily by minimal contact. That's why T Bell is destined to be a CoP RB for as long as he plays in DEN. Mike Bell shows everything that Shanahan is looking for in a DEN RB - he is very willing to do the dirty work like blocking in pass protection and he'll turn a no-gain play into a 2 or 3 yard gain with his power & lean. He won't break off many if any 60 yd TDs, but he'll keep the chains moving, keep the other team's D on the field, keep the other team's O from getting any rhythm, and keep the team from getting into a lot of 3rd & longs. That's Shanahan football. The simple fact is that M Bell's running style fits hand-in-glove with the DEN running scheme. It's not about who has the most physical ability, it's about who will be the most successful within the system, and allow the offense to operate at maximum efficiency. M Bell is that guy right now. The guy is downright explosive making his one cut into the seam, and he doesn't lose yardage. I think what you'll see as the preseason progresses is that M Bell will have solidified the #1 RB spot, T Bell is locked into the #2 RB/CoP spot, and if I don't miss my guess Dayne is going to end up on IR and Nash will make the team as the #3 RB, leaving Cobbs as the odd man out. DEN has already been trying to move Cobbs in a trade. Shanahan will see how the situation shakes out in the regular season and decide what to do with Dayne as the need at RB and/or injuries dictate. That gives Shanahan the luxury of making the Dayne/Nash decision 6 weeks later than he would normally have to, while giving himself the luxury of seeing if he made a mistake with M Bell in the regular season, plus seeing if Nash will contribute during the regular season the way Dayne did last year. I'd lean towards Dayne when it comes down to making a decision - he did well in the DEN system last year during the regular season, whereas Nash is making his bones vs 3rd stringers or worse. Another option would be putting Nash on the practice squad if Dayne gets healthy quicker than it looks like he will. Make no mistake, though. The #1 RB spot is not up for grabs anymore, unless M Bell drops the ball (literally & figuratively), and T Bell's inconsistency and wearing down in games has delegated him to the #2 RB spot, no better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 just before this last Denver preseason game, i had my league draft... Dayne went in the 7th to another owner. I took T.Bell in the 8th (keeper) then cuffed him with M.Bell in the 9th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 just before this last Denver preseason game, i had my league draft... Dayne went in the 7th to another owner. I took T.Bell in the 8th (keeper) then cuffed him with M.Bell in the 9th. Mike Bell, the starter, went in the 9th round?!?! And this draft was just a couple days ago??? Please let me know when there is an opening...or is it only for those who can't read? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 I just rolled the dice in Generation lost and took Mike Bell at 2.02 ... my options included Westbrook, JJones, Chester Taylor, SSmith, Fitz And boy let me tell you it was hard ... I looked long and hard at Chester Taylor but I'm just not convinced. This is probably a little early for MBell but I know there is no way he'd be there at 3.10 and I really liked him better than any of the other backs on the board. Now, I may regret passing on SSmith/Fitz. I believe you don't win with "safe" picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Mike Bell, the starter, went in the 9th round?!?! And this draft was just a couple days ago??? Please let me know when there is an opening...or is it only for those who can't read? oh you don't have to tell me. it was a frikkin yard sale. I was skeptical going into the draft as to how to handle the Broncos RB situation. It was looking more and more like T.Bell by himself on a FF roster is almost worthless. I was actually looking to trade T.Bell (my 8th rounder) for an extra 6th or 7th rounder. When I got there, either guys didn't care or had no clue who Mike Bell was which made my decision easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 I like Mike Bell enough to put him ahead of Chester Taylor... everyone is hip to the whole denver RB situation in my league and are likely sleeping on taylor....so I could probably draft them in the 4th and 6th rounds respectively.... but I will likely take M Bell in the 2nd... and honestly, he could be top 10 material behind that OL as he has slim competition as a starter....I completely disregard Dayne with his turf toe... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 I like Mike Bell enough to put him ahead of Chester Taylor... everyone is hip to the whole denver RB situation in my league and are likely sleeping on taylor....so I could probably draft them in the 4th and 6th rounds respectively.... but I will likely take M Bell in the 2nd... and honestly, he could be top 10 material behind that OL as he has slim competition as a starter....I completely disregard Dayne with his turf toe... I think we all would agree that IF Shanny sticks with one RB all year long then that RB is likely very desireable and a good bet to finish in the top 10. The concern is that either he won't stick with one RB or that it won't be Mike Bell. When I watch MBell against the first stringers the other night I was impressed he looked very good and he looked hungry. From what I saw there is no way MBell is not the starter UNLESS he starts to put the ball on the carpet. IMO Denver's offense is far and away better than Minnesota's. So I decided MBell was the best back on the board at pick 2.02. Now the question was should he be taken before the remaining WRs .. SSmith, Boldin, Fitz etc. And I decided if he is indeed a top 10 back then I would happily take him over those WRs. I also decided that word is out on MBell and it was highly unlikely that he would be there at 3.10. So there you have it ... that is how I arrived at MBell at 2.02. If he doesn't pan out then I better have done well in the rest of my draft because that pick will have hurt me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 I think we all would agree that IF Shanny sticks with one RB all year long then that RB is likely very desireable and a good bet to finish in the top 10. The concern is that either he won't stick with one RB or that it won't be Mike Bell. When I watch MBell against the first stringers the other night I was impressed he looked very good and he looked hungry. From what I saw there is no way MBell is not the starter UNLESS he starts to put the ball on the carpet. IMO Denver's offense is far and away better than Minnesota's. So I decided MBell was the best back on the board at pick 2.02. Now the question was should he be taken before the remaining WRs .. SSmith, Boldin, Fitz etc. And I decided if he is indeed a top 10 back then I would happily take him over those WRs. I also decided that word is out on MBell and it was highly unlikely that he would be there at 3.10. So there you have it ... that is how I arrived at MBell at 2.02. If he doesn't pan out then I better have done well in the rest of my draft because that pick will have hurt me. see...people think there is a RBBC.....from what I recall in 2002, I forget who the original starter was....but the idea was for Portis to take over and he ran well...the only knock was his fumbling (sound familiar)...now, Mike Bell is NO Portis....he doesn't have to be...but Portis took over in week 4 and was slowly being eased into the starting spot... then you have 2003...Portis ran the entire year aside from a short-term injury... 2004 it was griffin until he blew out his ACL in week 4 and then Droughns took over and was a fine back for me... 2005 was a mess because everybody sucked...Mike Anderson was already old and was not intended to be the starter.....they wanted Tatum to take over but he never lived up to expectations.... I have no fear in Mike Bell being the starter and being a 1300+ yd back if he can play every game.... tatum Bell will be a change of pace back who will steal a couple TD's on some homerun hits...but that's it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blips Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 From what I saw there is no way MBell is not the starter UNLESS he starts to put the ball on the carpet. That is one big UNLESS. Wait this one is bigger: UNLESS he starts to put the ball on the carpet. I'm hoping with you. I picked him up last week in an auction league early and cheap. So I decided MBell was the best back on the board at pick 2.02... and it was highly unlikely that he would be there at 3.10. 11 team league? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fpuma Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 On Friday night I grabbed M Bell in the 10th round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 That is one big UNLESS. Wait this one is bigger: UNLESS he starts to put the ball on the carpet. I'm hoping with you. I picked him up last week in an auction league early and cheap. 11 team league? I figured he meant 2.03 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 see...people think there is a RBBC.....from what I recall in 2002, I forget who the original starter was....but the idea was for Portis to take over and he ran well...the only knock was his fumbling (sound familiar)...now, Mike Bell is NO Portis....he doesn't have to be...but Portis took over in week 4 and was slowly being eased into the starting spot... then you have 2003...Portis ran the entire year aside from a short-term injury... 2004 it was griffin until he blew out his ACL in week 4 and then Droughns took over and was a fine back for me... 2005 was a mess because everybody sucked...Mike Anderson was already old and was not intended to be the starter.....they wanted Tatum to take over but he never lived up to expectations.... I have no fear in Mike Bell being the starter and being a 1300+ yd back if he can play every game.... tatum Bell will be a change of pace back who will steal a couple TD's on some homerun hits...but that's it... Yep, agree with you 100%. Okay, actually 90% as Griffin lost his starting job before getting injured on a punt/kick off return as we was benched after game 4. But I digress, as the rest of your post is right on the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 I figured he meant 2.03 No 2.02 was correct, I should have said 3.11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 Yep, agree with you 100%. Okay, actually 90% as Griffin lost his starting job before getting injured on a punt/kick off return as we was benched after game 4. But I digress, as the rest of your post is right on the money. ahh yes, I remember....he looked like garbage against the jags, right?...and then he just started to fall apart.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sleeper43 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 (edited) QUOTE "tatum Bell is notorious for his large gains and then doing nothing after that....he's pretty inconsistent..." Funny, the double standard we have and how shallow we are, this is exactly how Barry Sanders was and you dog him the first time and everyone thinks you are a chump Edited August 22, 2006 by sleeper43 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 22, 2006 Author Share Posted August 22, 2006 QUOTE "tatum Bell is notorious for his large gains and then doing nothing after that....he's pretty inconsistent..." Funny, the double standard we have and how shallow we are, this is exactly how Barry Sanders was and you dog him the first time and everyone thinks you are a chump I am speechless.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.