Rovers Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I have to admit, I found the thread title so ridiculous that this is the first time I ever even bothered to look at it. The only reason I did was because I figured it had drifted off topic! Who thinks Porter would have signed if he knew Moss was coming to town? No way. Porter wants to be a #1, period. He did nothing early in the season last year. Burleson has no competition for the ball, at least not yet, anyway. The Oakland situation could blow up, with Jordan, Porter, Moss and even Curry screaming for the ball. Burleson is a shoo-in for 1000 yards and at LEAST 8 TD's, more likely something like 1300 and 11. No way Porter gets close to those numbers. I'm amazed anyone would argue otherwise. :doah: I think this is just some subversive conspiracy to drive DMD to the brink! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I have to admit, I found the thread title so ridiculous that this is the first time I ever even bothered to look at it. The only reason I did was because I figured it had drifted off topic! Who thinks Porter would have signed if he knew Moss was coming to town? No way. Porter wants to be a #1, period. He did nothing early in the season last year. Burleson has no competition for the ball, at least not yet, anyway. The Oakland situation could blow up, with Jordan, Porter, Moss and even Curry screaming for the ball. Burleson is a shoo-in for 1000 yards and at LEAST 8 TD's, more likely something like 1300 and 11. No way Porter gets close to those numbers. I'm amazed anyone would argue otherwise. :doah: I think this is just some subversive conspiracy to drive DMD to the brink! 847062[/snapback] Rovers, the title of the thread is Porter v. Burleson...Which do you take? Going by their ADP in most of the mocks that I've seen, it's not quite so black & white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitansFan Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I'm surprised this thread hasn't been gunned yet. (though I hope it doesn't yet, I want to see DMD's response to Big Score's post) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Here's an interesting link to overall stats on Norv Turner teams, when he has been the Head Coach. www.pro-football-reference.com Worth noting (according to the stats from the above link) last year under Norv, Oakland ranked 4th in the league in pass attempts and 8th in the league in passing yardage. Rushing, Oakland ranked 32nd in attempts and not surprisingly, 32nd in rushing yards. Obviously the above rankings had a lot to do with Oakland constantly playing from behind, but has that much really changed with Oakland's D? We do know the O has changed with the additions of Moss & Jordan. Question is, do you think the addition of Moss means that Oakland's passing attempts will go down? I do expect Oakland's rushing rank to rise, but I would not be at all surprised to see Oakland's passing rank remain the same, or at least relatively close to their 2004 ranking. 847040[/snapback] As noted, OAK had the least amount of rushes and yards of any NFL team - by a bit of a margin actually. Now they have Lamont Jordan who will be relied to produce what was never there last year - a rushing game. Out of 16 games in 2004, there were only 5 times an OAK runner exceed 50 yards in a game. Over 2/3rds of the entire season, not one runner for OAK gained over just 50 yards in one game. In those 11 other games, no runner had over 12 carries. How often do you think that Jordan will run less than 12 times in a game? If Norv Turner's background says anything that is consistent, it is that he always uses a powerback workhorse. That is his signature, not passing. When your defense sucks, there is even more reason to want to run the ball just to keep it away from the opponent. Oakland had 36 passes per game last year on average - just one short of the leader GB. Another thing - when you have a bad defense, like Oakland, then what happens is the other team gets a lead and then just runs the clock out. That reduces the amount of plays that OAK will have. I could buy that OAK's passing numbers will remain nearly the same if the rushing game is just as pathetic this season. Moss will be a good addition no doubt. but if the defense has not changed, and the rushing game will be improved, then I do not see how the passing numbers will possibly go up. By week 8, OAK will have played @NE, @PHI, DAL, BUF and had a BYE in addition to playing KC and SD. Let's see how productive the passing game will be there by midseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I could buy that OAK's passing numbers will remain nearly the same if the rushing game is just as pathetic this season. Moss will be a good addition no doubt. but if the defense has not changed, and the rushing game will be improved, then I do not see how the passing numbers will possibly go up. 847126[/snapback] I agree with you here. I don't see Oakland's passing #'s going up either. I expect the Oakland passing game to hover around it's 2004 ranking. However, I do think the addition of Moss will only increase it's potency (it was already the 8th best in passing yards last year). Whether or not this ultimately benefits Porter remains to be seen, but I wouldn't expect a precipitous decrease in Porter's numbers. I could very well be 100% wrong, but hey, that's why we call it Fantasy Football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts