Chadman Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I suppose I deserve to be corrected. Never is too strong a word - he did have one good year back in the day at almost 1300 yards, only rushing for 5 TD's that season, tho. That yardage number is about his total rushing for the subsequent five years combined, when he managed to fumble more than score TD's, and I think he had more injuries in those short spurts than either of the two. You also mentioned the career rushing average, last season it was 2.6, which is probably a more realistic measure of current worth, considering he is an aging veteran, completely dependent on speed and being healthy to maintain the speed. But yes, he did have the one good season. I pretty much stand by the rest of my post, except for the word "never", then, I guess. It's true we will see how it plays out in the next few weeks. I agree with the idea that Pittman may get the call if/when healthy again, but Graham may have a big one this weekend, and carry on through a playoff run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROYALWITCHEESE Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 In the 2 weeks that Graham was given the main role he played Indy and Tennessee. Both of those teams are stout versus the run. Let's see how Graham does aganst the Lions this week before we throw him away and anoint Bennett the main RB. Why would you want to start a guy who can only perform against bad defenses?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Why would you want to start a guy who can only perform against bad defenses?? I don't have to make that decision but if my RBs were in bad shape or my main guys were on a bye, Graham could be a solid plug-in when the right matchup presents itself, like this week against the Lions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobias1237 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 In the 2 weeks that Graham was given the main role he played Indy and Tennessee. Both of those teams are stout versus the run. Let's see how Graham does aganst the Lions this week before we throw him away and anoint Bennett the main RB. Since when has Indy been stout against the run? Oh, you mean that same Indy D that broke the record for giving up the most rushing yards in a half against Denver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Since when has Indy been stout against the run? Oh, you mean that same Indy D that broke the record for giving up the most rushing yards in a half against Denver. Oh, since about week one of this year. That is, relatively. They're 13th out of 32 against the rush. Of course, they also got out to a big lead vs Tampa so that sort of ended the whole running game element. However, they pretty much shut both Graham and Pittman down right off the bat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobias1237 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Oh, since about week one of this year. That is, relatively. They're 13th out of 32 against the rush. Of course, they also got out to a big lead vs Tampa so that sort of ended the whole running game element. However, they pretty much shut both Graham and Pittman down right off the bat. When about half of the teams in the NFL are better than you at stopping the run I wouldn't exactly call them stout. And you made a good point about the Tampa game, and that usually happens every games they play. They get a lead, and the team ditches the run to play catch-up. I will say their pass defense is very good, but their run defense is nothing to brag about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROYALWITCHEESE Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I don't have to make that decision but if my RBs were in bad shape or my main guys were on a bye, Graham could be a solid plug-in when the right matchup presents itself, like this week against the Lions. What I mean is, if you are the Bucs, why would you want to start the guy who will only play well if the other team stinks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 What I mean is, if you are the Bucs, why would you want to start the guy who will only play well if the other team stinks? Oh well, if that's the proven case, which at this point we don't know for sure, than I agree with you. 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.