Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 43

Thread: RB core ratings

  1. #11
    VKG4LFE's Avatar
    VKG4LFE is offline Jersey Retired Tetris Champion, Monkey GO Happy 4 Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Hartford, WI
    Posts
    16,013

    RB core ratings

    http://msn.foxsports.com/story/2491416

    There you go, briboy!

    I get the most pissed off looks from people with my VKG 4 LFE Wisconsin license plate, and I LOVE IT!!

  2. #12
    packmanxxxi is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    660

    RB core ratings

    I meant to say the Pack finidhed first in the division... the Vikings second.. that is the ONLY stat that matters.

    And of course people on this site wouldnt agree... but you talk about the Packers "no-namers".... umm, look at your own team....
    3 Straight Division Champs

  3. #13
    superior230bartime is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    431

    RB core ratings

    "purplehorn" wrote:
    Ahman Green
    Najeh Davenport
    Tony Fisher
    Dahrran Diedrick
    Walter Williams

    I give credit where credits due Green had a great
    year and should this year as well, but the other no
    names here? Just a little biased? Reminds me I
    haven't read the funny papers today
    You obviously have no clue or have never seen any of the GB backups play. Davenport is a fucking bulldozer with some speed and rarely is tackled by the first man. Tony Fisher is also very capable both as a rusher and receiver. As a backup tandem they are every bit as good if not better than Onterrio and Moe. They both, along with Ahman, averaged more than 5 yards per carry last year. Of course, this also says a lot about the packers o-line which you guys also like to discredit. As far as number one offense, Vikes were number one in yards but if you go with the stat that matters(points) the Packers were better along with 4 other teams.
    purplepride.org: Home of Disillusioned Vikings Fans World-wide

  4. #14
    purplehorn is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,374

    RB core ratings

    Time to get the clouds out of your eyes sb. Both
    you backups combined did not have the yards
    as our third and goal back Moe Williams and lets
    not even try to compare with the rookie Smith.
    Your boys are ok but can not and I repeat can not
    compare to the Viking core. So wake up and smell
    the Purple.
    Green Bay police station toilet stolen.

    Cops say they have nothing to go on.

  5. #15
    muchluv4smoot's Avatar
    muchluv4smoot is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,318

    RB core ratings

    "superior230bartime" wrote:
    "purplehorn" wrote:
    Ahman Green
    Najeh Davenport
    Tony Fisher
    Dahrran Diedrick
    Walter Williams

    I give credit where credits due Green had a great
    year and should this year as well, but the other no
    names here? Just a little biased? Reminds me I
    haven't read the funny papers today
    You obviously have no clue or have never seen any of the GB backups play. Davenport is a fucking bulldozer with some speed and rarely is tackled by the first man. Tony Fisher is also very capable both as a rusher and receiver. As a backup tandem they are every bit as good if not better than Onterrio and Moe. They both, along with Ahman, averaged more than 5 yards per carry last year. Of course, this also says a lot about the packers o-line which you guys also like to discredit. As far as number one offense, Vikes were number one in yards but if you go with the stat that matters(points) the Packers were better along with 4 other teams.


    Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe a teams d has a lot to do with how many points a team scores. If we would have had the #1 d last year, you can't seriously say we wouldn't have scored many many more points. You guys had a better d, thus scored more points. Our d had a hard time getting the other teams offense off the field, thus our offense was on the bench without a chance to score. Sorry, but scoring offense isn't what really matters when comparing 2 offenses. It matters most for wins, but not when deciding which offense is better. I don't beilieve that totals yards is the best way to determine the best offense, but it is a better measure IMO. You need to look at more than just total yards or points, to figure out which offense is better.


    As far as RB's go, I would have to give us the edge over Gren bay, but not by a big margine. I am sure the pack were #1 because they did have the #1 rush offense in the NFL last year, but that doesn't mean they have the best RB's. Their offensive line had a lot to do with their rushing last year, and they did have the best O-line in the league last year. We didn't even have our pro bowl RB for most of last year, and he wasn't 100% form the few games we did have him, yet we were still able to run the ball well.

    Yes, green is better than benett, I don't think anyone is trying to argue this. I would definately take Moe over fisher, and onterrio over davenport, and also throw in mewelde moore and we have a very talented RB corp. Green bay does have a good one, but probably were only rated #1 because of their rushing last year.

    While I agree with you Los that our RB's are close, I think the vikes do have the edge in talent, and the pack have the edge in o-line.

  6. #16
    sdvikefan is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,321

    RB core ratings

    Well everybody here is biased and I admit I think the Vikings have a
    better total backfield than the Packers. But I wouldn't put either team at the top spot.

    Truth is the Chiefs deserve to be there. Neither Ahman Green or Michael Bennett is quite at the
    level of Priest Holmes who is probably the second most consistent RB in the league (after Tomlinson). They have awesome potential with Larry Johnson who hasn't proven himself
    simply because...well they have the High Priest and right now he's healthy. But if he goes
    down I think Johnson and Blaylock, who stepped in for Priest a few times and did very well last year, are more than enough depth to keep the Chiefs explosive running game going.

    And I would put the Rams ahead of the Packers but probably right behind the Vikes. Say what you want about Marshall Faulk he is still better than most RBs in the league. Adding Steven Jackson was a huge pickup for them and could make an immediate impact. Lamar Gordon, like Moe Williams, is more than able to handle the load if asked as he showed last year several times.
    "Meet at the quarterback!" -Purple People Eaters

  7. #17
    muchluv4smoot's Avatar
    muchluv4smoot is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,318

    RB core ratings

    "VKG4LFE" wrote:
    http://msn.foxsports.com/story/2491416

    There you go, briboy!


    The QB ratings aren't bad, except for the panthers at 4??? Sorry but no way they are anywhere near #4.

    The packers do have one of the leagues best backups now, in couch. They are ranked correctly. I would move the vikes up ahead of the chiefs and move the panthers down to 10, making the vikes #5.

  8. #18
    superior230bartime is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    431

    RB core ratings

    "purplehorn" wrote:
    Time to get the clouds out of your eyes sb. Both
    you backups combined did not have the yards
    as our third and goal back Moe Williams and lets
    not even try to compare with the rookie Smith.
    Your boys are ok but can not and I repeat can not
    compare to the Viking core. So wake up and smell
    the Purple.
    Yeah, great argument. Moe was your starting running back for half the year while Bennett was out. You got me there Purplehorn.
    purplepride.org: Home of Disillusioned Vikings Fans World-wide

  9. #19
    dan3ski's Avatar
    dan3ski is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    878

    RB core ratings

    Alot of what i feel a qb should be is a leader first and foremost and so far I have yet to see leadership from Culpepper. Yes he is abetter athelete then the panthers qb but it was his leadership on the field that got them to the big dance.
    can we clone Bud Grant?

  10. #20
    ItalianStallion's Avatar
    ItalianStallion is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,615

    RB core ratings

    Getting a good average as a starting running back is alot harder than averaging more than 5 when you onl go in 5-10 plays a game bartime. When Onterrio burns of back to back 140 yard games (with 4 tds) as a starter, and Moe fills in for half the year as a starter and the offense doesn't miss a beat, I think that is considerably more impressive than Davenport putting together a handful of good runs (when not tired) for Ahman. I think our offense has proven it can still put a great running game together no matter who starts, I don't think the Packers can claim the same thing.


    I m like a Ja Rule poster, cause I'm off the wall.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Vikings WR Core
    By DaVizzles in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-08-2007, 06:45 AM
  2. Hard-Core Porn Interrupts News Show
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-15-2007, 12:33 PM
  3. Hard core Steelers fan.
    By Prophet in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-07-2006, 12:19 PM
  4. Hard Core Steelers Fan
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-15-2005, 03:53 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •