Reuben Droughns..........

[Skrappy1]

I'm sure someone will post the link.

751387[/snapback]

 

 

 

get a brain, morans

 

751390[/snapback]

 

 

 

I knew you guys wouldn't let me down.

F'n newbs!

 

751395[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Almost forgot:

Edited March 25, 2005 by Skrappy1

[Lonestar39]

Not a newbie, have been around since about 1998, but I don't live on here either so my "HuddleSpeak" isn't up to date obviously.

 

Baby Arm

[Bill Swerski]

You're saying that any back can have success in Minnesota, yet they haven't had a RB rush for over 1,000 yards since 2002. 

 

751327[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

My God, what a ridiculously poor argument. Might that have something to do with the fact that only one back (Williams, 179) has had 125 carries over the past two seasons? It's kind of difficult to rush for 1,000 yards if Tice won't even give you 200 carries.

 

Smith, Bennett, and Moore all averaged way over 4 yds/carry last year. Bennett put up a measley 3.9. Any back worth a darn could put up similar numbers.

 

I'm not saying that cutting Moore would necessarily be the most intelligent thing for them to do. My point was that he's not critical to Minnesota's running game, as Onterrio Smith is clearly their best overall back right now and Moe Williams is their best short-yardage option.

 

Furthermore, Mewelde (again, no pun intended) might not even have that much value on the free agent market, given his limited playing time and the fact that he was bothered by an ankle injury for a good portion of last season. If I'm a GM, I'm not sure that I'd want to give up a thrid- or fourth-round pick for a guy who played very well for a few games in his rookie year, injured his ankle, and rode the pine for the remainder of the season. That might explain why someone like LaMont Jordan garnered significantly more interest on the free agent market. And, despite what Tice has said, the Vikings were clearly looking to trade some offensive talent (:cough: Moss :cough:) to shore up their defense.

Edited March 25, 2005 by Bill Swerski

[Skrappy1]

My God, what a ridiculously poor argument.  Might that have something to do with the fact that only one back (Williams, 179) has had 125 carries over the past two seasons?   It's kind of difficult to rush for 1,000 yards if Tice won't even give you 200 carries. 

751437[/snapback]

 

 

 

That's it Bill, try to latch on to and distort one point in an attempt to salvage your completely assinine assertion. Actually, that is the pot calling the kettle black if ever I've heard it. Perhaps you missed the last line of that statement of mine that read, "Comparing their system to Denver's is simply not a fair comparison." I used those numbers simply to illustrate that there is no comparison between the system in Denver to the system in Minnesota, a comparison that you had attempted to make.

 

Smith, Bennett, and Moore all averaged way over 4 yds/carry last year.  Bennett put up a measley 3.9.  Any back worth a darn could put up similar numbers.

And Moore averaged 5.8 YPC...clearly there is a marked difference between 3.9 and 5.8 within the same system. You said if you were an NFL GM, you would want to see more of Moore before making a decision to trade for him, and that his success is a product of Minnesota's system. I'm not a Bennett fan, but he is the only one out of the group in Minnesota that has had a 1,000 yard rushing season to his name, and his career YPC before last season was a very respectable 4.69. If Bennett only averaged 3.9 YPC in the Viking's system last season, and every one of their other RBs rushed for a considerably higher YPC, then those other guys must be at least pretty decent, right?

I'm not saying that cutting Moore would necessarily be the most intelligent thing for them to do.  My point was that he's not critical to Minnesota's running game

And now you are trying to contend that you were right along, yet are ammending your original statement in the process...you can't have it both ways Bill. You said, 'I disagree that cutting Mewelde Moore would be "moranic."' You did not say, "The Vikings can afford to lose Mewelde Moore as they have several other talented RBs." If you didn't consider any factor into your statement other then their RB depth, then you either misspoke or you didn't think before you did speak. Either way, everyone that has responded to your argument has said that you are wrong Bill...get the hint.

 

Furthermore, Mewelde (again, no pun intended) might not even have that much value on the free agent market, given his limited playing time and the fact that he was bothered by an ankle injury for a good portion of last season.  That might explain why someone like LaMont Jordan garnered significantly more interest on the free agent market.

You know as well as I do that there was some skepticism as to how badly Moore's ankle was actually injured last season. He said himself he was fine and ready to play several weeks before they activated him. His extended time on the bench was more likely a product of Tice's man-love for Bennett and Smith than it was for a lack of durability concerning Moore. Furthermore, Jordan set a career high for touches last season with 108 (93 rushes and 15 catches). Despite the games he missed, Moore compiled nearly as many with 92 touches last season (65 rushes and 27 catches). Jordan hasn't proven himself more durable than Moore IMO.

Edited March 26, 2005 by Skrappy1

[broncosn05]

Another vote for he is terrible and let Tatum Bell play. Is there any votes towards that?

[WaterMan]

Can I cuss?

[Joe Public]

Reuben Droughns is waiting to break out.

[gogo2146]

For the first time I think Droughns can play if given the chance and the right team. Now, Bell Is a scat back and is very good type of change the pace player. I do no tthink he is big enough to make the entire season. He has great ability and can ball I give him that but we wll see soon whenhe is asked to carry the load in Denver. I would to see him in Arizona for a high roud draft pick and then AZ draft a top five rb in the first 4 rounds good vaule late this year for rb's.

[Shot_Kings]

Another vote for he is terrible and let Tatum Bell play.  Is there any votes towards that?

 

751553[/snapback]

 

 

 

Well, as a Bell owner in a keeper league I vote yes!

 

But I don't think Droughns is terrible. Like every other back in the NFL, he is a talented player who can excel in the right system. But if Bell can stay healthy, his greater explosiveness gives the Broncos an advantage that they don't want to pass up on. So Skeletor is right to make Bell the feature back while seeing what value he can get for Droughns on the trade front.

 

Sometimes NFL coaches know their own talent better than fantasy football owners.

[Bill Swerski]

That's it Bill, try to latch on to and distort one point in an attempt to salvage your completely assinine assertion.

751548[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Even someone of your intellectual capacity knows the reason why nobody has had a 1,000-yd rushing season in MIN since '02. If you don't want me "distorting" your points, don't make third-grade arguments that are so easily shot down.

 

Perhaps you missed the last line of that statement of mine that read, "Comparing their system to Denver's is simply not a fair comparison." I used those numbers simply to illustrate that there is no comparison between the system in Denver to the system in Minnesota, a comparison that you had attempted to make. 

 

 

I disagree with that as well. Both Denver and Minnesota have great offensive lines and very good passing games.

 

And Moore averaged 5.8 YPC...clearly there is a marked difference between 3.9 and 5.8 within the same system.  You said if you were an NFL GM, you would want to see more of Moore before making a decision to trade for him, and that his success is a product of Minnesota's system.

 

Yeah, I'd like to see more than 65 carries. That's a whole three games for a featured back.

 

BTW, Minnesota's backs averaged 4.7 yds/carry last season (with Smith getting the majority of the carries). Moe Williams averaged 5.4 yds/carry and Onterrio Smith averaged 4.4 yds/carry. That sounds to me like Minnesota's backs benefit tremendously from their offensive system (not unlike Denver's).

 

And now you are trying to contend that you were right along, yet are ammending your original statement in the process...you can't have it both ways Bill.  You said, 'I disagree that cutting Mewelde Moore would be "moranic."'  You did not say, "The Vikings can afford to lose Mewelde Moore as they have several other talented RBs."  If you didn't consider any factor into your statement other then their RB depth, then you either misspoke or you didn't think before you did speak.

 

No, I considered multiple factors, moran. The Vikes certainly could afford to lose Moore because of (1) their solid line and passing game and (2) their RB depth. And I'll go ahead and agree with you that, hypothetically, it would be in their best interest to try to trade Moore, rather than outright cut him. That's true for anybody. But I'm not going to call them "morans" for cutting a guy who had a whole 65 carries in his pro career before injuring his ankle.

 

Either way, everyone that has responded to your argument has said that you are wrong Bill...get the hint.

 

Unlike you, I don't need popular opinion to formulate an argument.

 

You know as well as I do that there was some skepticism as to how badly Moore's ankle was actually injured last season.  He said himself he was fine and ready to play several weeks before they activated him.  His extended time on the bench was more likely a product of Tice's man-love for Bennett and Smith than it was for a lack of durability concerning Moore.

 

I didn't realize that you could read Tice's mind.

 

Somehow, I don't see "man-love" factoring into Tice's decision. I'll go with the theories that Smith is more talented than Moore and that both Smith and Bennett are more experienced and have a better understanding of the offense than Moore. Oh, and Smith and Bennett were actually healthy during the latter half of the season.

 

Jordan hasn't proven himself more durable than Moore IMO.

 

That's probably because you haven't looked at his stats...

 

LaMont Jordan: 64 games (4 seasons), 62 games played, 262 carries, 50 receptions

 

Mewelde Moore: 16 games (1 season), 10 games played, 65 carries, 27 receptions

 

Clearly, Jordan has proven himself to be durable over the long haul. Moore has not done so yet.

Edited March 28, 2005 by Bill Swerski

[Skrappy1]

Perhaps you missed the last line of that statement of mine that read, "Comparing their system to Denver's is simply not a fair comparison." I used those numbers simply to illustrate that there is no comparison between the system in Denver to the system in Minnesota, a comparison that you had attempted to make. 

 

751548[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I disagree with that as well.  Both Denver and Minnesota have great offensive lines and very good passing games.

 

753676[/snapback]

 

 

 

Swerski, their systems are as different as night and day. I'll explain this in simple numbers, please try and follow along:

 

2004:

 

Vikings - 289 rushes for 1360 yards and 6 TDs + 106 catches for 1081 yards and 4 TDs

 

Broncos - 459 rushes for 2060 yards and 12 TDs + 58 catches for 535 yards and 5 TDs

 

-Minnesota hasn't had a 1,000 yard rusher since Bennett's 1,296 in 2002. Denver hasn't NOT has a 1,000 yard rusher since 2001.

 

-The Vikings RBs nearly equalled their rushing yardage in receiving yardage. Denver had almost a 4-1 rushing/receiving ratio among their backs.

 

-Denver is a run-first, pound the ball down their opponent's throat type of team. Minnesota is a pass downfield, run the ball only as much as necessary type of team who utilizes their RBs almost as much as receivers as they do as rushers.

 

-Denver has exceeded 2,000 yards rushing as a team in each of the last 3 seasons. Minnesota's highest total within that same timeframe is 1,804 in 2003.

 

Their offensive systems are in absolutely no way similar, regardless of the fact that they both have competent offensive lines Bill...get a clue man.

Edited March 28, 2005 by Skrappy1

[NAUgrad]

For the first time I think Droughns can play if given the chance and the right team.  Now, Bell Is a scat back and is very good type of change the pace player. I do no tthink he is big enough to make the entire season. He has great ability and can ball I give him that but we wll see soon whenhe is asked to carry the load in Denver.  I would to see him in Arizona for a high roud draft pick and then AZ draft a top five rb in the first 4 rounds good vaule late this year for rb's.

 

752087[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Actually, they are almost the exact same size. According the Broncos roster, both are 5'11". Droughns weighs in at 220, and Bell is 213. Bell just has more speed with basically the same weight. I think the reason why we didn't see Bell as much last year is that it may have taken him most of the season to pick up on the plays. In other words, not the sharpest tack in the drawer.

[Bill Swerski]

Swerski, their systems are as different as night and day.  I'll explain this in simple numbers, please try and follow along:

 

2004:

 

Vikings - 289 rushes for 1360 yards and 6 TDs + 106 catches for 1081 yards and 4 TDs

 

Broncos - 459 rushes for 2060 yards and 12 TDs + 58 catches for 535 yards and 5 TDs

 

753792[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

You forgot about these stats...

 

2003 Vikes: 2343 yds rushing, 4.75 yds/carry, ranked 4th in the league

 

2002 Vikes: 2507 yds rushing, 5.30 yds/carry, ranked 1st in the league

 

2000 Vikes: 2129 yds rushing, 4.97 yds/carry, ranked 6th in the league

 

Oops..

[Skrappy1]

You forgot about these stats...

 

2003 Vikes: 2343 yds rushing, 4.75 yds/carry, ranked 4th in the league

 

2002 Vikes: 2507 yds rushing, 5.30 yds/carry, ranked 1st in the league

 

2000 Vikes: 2129 yds rushing, 4.97 yds/carry, ranked 6th in the league

 

Oops..  

 

753804[/snapback]

 

 

 

Um, actually no Bill. Those are the stats including the QB, Culpepper. We're talking RB systems, are we not? Please try again.

 

2003 Vikes: 1,804 yds rushing

2002 Vikes: 1,799 yds rushing

 

Edit: Actually, those aren't the correct stats even if you do add in Culpepper. Where are you getting your information from? Better check it again.

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min2002.htm

Edited March 28, 2005 by Skrappy1

[Bill Swerski]

Um, actually no Bill.  Those are the stats including the QB, Culpepper.  We're talking RB systems, are we not?  Please try again.

 

2003 Vikes: 1,804 yds rushing

2002 Vikes: 1,799 yds rushing

 

Edit:  Actually, those aren't the correct stats even if you do add in Culpepper.  Where are you getting your information from?  Better check it again.

 

753810[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Um, no, actually the offensive numbers that I gave were correct. Team rushing stats are not limited to halfbacks.

 

But if you want to continue to believe that the Vikings haven't been able to run the ball effectively over the past few years, go right ahead.

[Skrappy1]

But if you want to continue to believe that the Vikings haven't been able to run the ball effectively over the past few years, go right ahead.

 

753819[/snapback]

 

 

 

You seriously are as stupid as they come. Never did I imply they couldn't run the ball effectively. But that isn't what their game is centered around...Denver's is.

 

And your stats are still wrong, either that or you're flat out lying.

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min2002.htm

Edited March 28, 2005 by Skrappy1

[Bill Swerski]

Never did I imply they couldn't run the ball effectively.  But that isn't what their game is centered around...Denver's is. 

 

And your stats are still wrong, either that or you're flat out lying.  

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min2002.htm

 

753822[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

And never did I imply that Minnesota's offense is exactly the same as Denver's. This is what I said when comparing the two:

 

Both Denver and Minnesota have great offensive lines and very good passing games.

 

That sounds to me like Minnesota's backs benefit tremendously from their offensive system (not unlike Denver's).

 

 

My stats are correct because I spoke only of offensive rushing, and did not limit my argument to halfbacks. Then again, even if you take out Culpepper's contributions to MIN's team rushing stats, the backs have still averaged over 4.7 yds/carry in 2000, 2002, 2003, and 2004, which is incredibly good. The fact that MIN throws the ball more than DEN doesn't mean that they're not running the ball as effectively. The yds/carry average data clearly show the opposite. They're just doing it less often (which is likely because their recent defenses have sucked and they're often playing from behind).

 

You seriously are as stupid as they come. 

 

Go ahead and think so if you'd like.

 

Sincerely,

Bill Swerski

Postdoctoral Research Associate

Edited March 28, 2005 by Bill Swerski

[alexgaddis]

Sometimes NFL coaches know their own talent better than fantasy football owners

 

 

Quote of the Year...

 

[Brewer]

Just saw a report that the Browns and Broncos are close on a deal involving Droughns.

[Gators]

Great trade for Cleveland. I think Droughns will prove the Browns right. Hes tough, quick footed and plays through injuries....