Thread: Who should be the starting RB
10-25-2004, 01:42 PM #41
Who should be the starting RB
SnowinA, umm, we exposed Randy in what??? '98? What difference did that make? We have done RBBC for how long now? Moe on goal line and 3rd, Bennett otherwise, unless we need to pass. Back when, it was David Palmer on 3rd. Bennett is the starter. MM is the new Moe in my opinion and he will do well. How many 60+ yard TD's in consecutive games for EITHER O. Smith or MM? ZERO! Bennett? 3. How many pro bowls? Yep.
Is this a fluke? I bet not. Anyone else remember our other injury prone RB? Seems from most of the posters, no. He was R. Smith. He was a starter too. MM SHOULD definitly have a role, and Mike needs to earn his start back. But he is the Moss of RB's. Wait and see.
The difference that it made was when his contract came up he asked for huge Money. If we had 3 other Randys on the team there is no way he would have played and no way that he would have got paid(big time).
We could use that money for defense. Our reported 30 million under the cap for next year could go for D. If we spend that money now and have to sign Moore in 2 yrs to a larger contract we could be in a position where we might not be able to afford him. I am talking about Money. As far as the Vikes, it is good for us to know what we have in the guy but what I was saying is that it didn't have to happen so soon.
10-25-2004, 01:46 PM #42
Who should be the starting RB
Until Bennett shows signs of his injury lingering he should and will get the start. He has proven himself over the past few years and is still our star runningback. He will start against NYG but he will share carries with both MM and MW. Brad Johnson was very injury prone, and until Randall brought his A game in 98, Johnson would always return as the starter. I know that is very different from our current situation, but still relavent.
Henry got his job back from McGahee.
I thought it was an unwritten rule that players that lose their jobs to injuries get a chance to get it back but it is not always true.
Griffin played a great game against the Chiefs in week one, came out the next 2 weeks against some tough run defenses, gets hurt, and Droughns went in and never came back out. In the games where Droughns and Griffin played, their yds/carry were not noticably differrent. It must be based on the teams confidence in the player. I had the impression the Shanny wanted to start Griffin again but it never happened.
I think the Vike players have confidence in all the RBs and so do the coaches.
From the Vikings Update article:
Thereâ€™s an axiom in the NFL that says a player doesnâ€™t lose his job due to injury, but the fact is, over the last two years, the Vikings are 11-1 in their first six games â€” all without Bennett. Their record with Bennett as the go-to back is sub-.500. As for Williams, he was never projected to be a featured back. As for Smith, Tice had him rated as a first-round prospect last year, but waited until the fourth round because of previous problems with marijuana that got him kicked off the Tennessee Volunteers football team.
I like the part about O.Smith. Sound like he has a chronic(pun) problem
We may have to keep him. He may not be trade worthy after his Drug Suspension.
By ultravikingfan in forum Vikings Fan ForumReplies: 202Last Post: 11-12-2007, 06:44 AM
By V-Unit in forum Vikings Fan ForumReplies: 38Last Post: 08-06-2007, 11:39 AM
By Prophet in forum Vikings Fan ForumReplies: 0Last Post: 08-28-2006, 11:15 AM
By midgensa in forum The ClubhouseReplies: 6Last Post: 07-28-2005, 01:47 AM
By AlabamaViking in forum Vikings Fan ForumReplies: 60Last Post: 05-19-2005, 04:41 PM