Which running back could be the odd man out?

[ausbacker]

So basically a player needs to meet in the middle with a Touch of Grey?

Nah, the player simply needs to be playing well.

 

[BradyFTW!]

You mean we can't have a team full of veteran 25 year olds with multiple-championship pedigree and bona fide leadership presence?

 

[patriotscpfc]

Agreed. I don't want Maroney on the roster either. I'll take, Rookie, Taylor, Faulk, Morris, and BJGE.

So after 3 games, we'll be left with Faulk and Lawfirm after the other 3 are injured...

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I'm fine the way they are for this year, maybe next year this can be addressed. Who's out there that would be a significant upgrade over any (aside from BJGE)? With all the needs we have do we really want to risk drafting another Maroney type in round 1/2? Again, hard to see anything being a worthful upgrade over what we have.

 

[spacecrime]

It pisses me off the people that subscribe to the year older garbage. Whilst you might be a year older, you'll always have what the rookies don't... experience..

Interesting. At the risk of pissing you off, I would say the exact opposite.

A rookie, going from this first season to his second, gains a WEALTH of experience.

An aging vet, going from year 12 to year 13, learns almost nothing new (if he didn't learn it in 12 years, 13 ain't gonna help).

A rookie will lose no speed or quickness going from age 22 to 23.

An aging RB going from age 32 to 33 will lose quite a bit. Playing smart helps only to a degree, otherwise LdT, S. Alexander, D. Terrell, E. Smith, etc would still be playing, not to mention Walter Payton, Jim Brown, Franco Harris, OJ, Marcus Allen, etc etc etc

I'm all for having two older RBs on a team.One would be okay, but old RBs rarely make a whole season. But when you sign a former great RB for small money, it's a sign that he is past his prime. Get a year or two out of him, and get someone else. Better to let him go a year early than a year late.

 

[patsinthesnow]

Interesting. At the risk of pissing you off, I would say the exact opposite.

A rookie, going from this first season to his second, gains a WEALTH of experience.

An aging vet, going from year 12 to year 13, learns almost nothing new (if he didn't learn it in 12 years, 13 ain't gonna help).

A rookie will lose no speed or quickness going from age 22 to 23.

An aging RB going from age 32 to 33 will lose quite a bit. Playing smart helps only to a degree, otherwise LdT, S. Alexander, D. Terrell, E. Smith, etc would still be playing, not to mention Walter Payton, Jim Brown, Franco Harris, OJ, Marcus Allen, etc etc etc

I'm all for having two older RBs on a team.One would be okay, but old RBs rarely make a whole season. But when you sign a former great RB for small money, it's a sign that he is past his prime. Get a year or two out of him, and get someone else. Better to let him go a year early than a year late.

Hence why I want both Taylor and Morris gone.

Does anyone else feel BJGE is a better back going into year three at age 24 then 34 year old Fred Taylor or 32 year old Sammy Morris? I'd rate the backs on the team right now as:

1. Laurence Maroney
2. BJGE
3. Fred Taylor
4. Sammy Morris
5. Faulk

That is from running the ball perspective. Faulk is #2 as an overall back. I don't think Faulk gets one carry out of iso, they're all draws.

Get rid of the old trash (except Faulk, he's an aging wine ), and draft a young guy.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

You mean we can't have a team full of veteran 25 year olds with multiple-championship pedigree and bona fide leadership presence?

high drama alert

 

[tanked_as_usual]

its one thing if the pats were prime for SB contention next year........they're not......but the following year, they could well be in the hunt again, so why not invest in youth in the position? they already brought faulk back and he's a perfect mentor for some rookie 3rd down back......as for a guy like ben tate, all he has to do is make one move, run downhill, and keep his feet moving........

 

[ScrewDrvr]

Fred is still the best running back on this team.

BJGE and Morris gone, then draft a rookie.

Fred runs best with a fullback also.

 

[mgteich]

Green-Ellis is our #5 RB.
He was last year.
Green-Ellis couldn't get on the field much last year, even with TWO injuries.
Only folks on message boads think the Green-Ellis is out #2 running back or should be.

That being said, I would be fine with
Maroney
Taylor or Morris
Faulk

pick up one or two running backs, h-backs or fuillbacks to compete with Green-Ellis for a roster spot or two. And yes, it is indeed POSSIBLE that the result could end being the release of Taylor AND Morris. I just think that this is unlikely to happen. After all, I'd much rather have Taylor than Green-Ellis as my insurance back against two injuries. In 2009, Green-Ellis needed more than two injuries to get signifiant reps.

Hence why I want both Taylor and Morris gone.

Does anyone else feel BJGE is a better back going into year three at age 24 then 34 year old Fred Taylor or 32 year old Sammy Morris? I'd rate the backs on the team right now as:

1. Laurence Maroney
2. BJGE
3. Fred Taylor
4. Sammy Morris
5. Faulk

That is from running the ball perspective. Faulk is #2 as an overall back. I don't think Faulk gets one carry out of iso, they're all draws.

Get rid of the old trash (except Faulk, he's an aging wine ), and draft a young guy.

 

[crowell33]

Green-Ellis is our #5 RB.
He was last year.
Green-Ellis couldn't get on the field much last year, even with TWO injuries.
Only folks on message boads think the Green-Ellis is out #2 running back or should be.

That being said, I would be fine with
Maroney
Taylor or Morris
Faulk

pick up one or two running backs, h-backs or fuillbacks to compete with Green-Ellis for a roster spot or two. And yes, it is indeed POSSIBLE that the result could end being the release of Taylor AND Morris. I just think that this is unlikely to happen. After all, I'd much rather have Taylor than Green-Ellis as my insurance back against two injuries. In 2009, Green-Ellis needed more than two injuries to get signifiant reps.

If Laurence Maroney is our top running back, I think we need to draft a running back.

 

[ausbacker]

Interesting. At the risk of pissing you off, I would say the exact opposite.

A rookie, going from this first season to his second, gains a WEALTH of experience.

An aging vet, going from year 12 to year 13, learns almost nothing new (if he didn't learn it in 12 years, 13 ain't gonna help).

A rookie will lose no speed or quickness going from age 22 to 23.

An aging RB going from age 32 to 33 will lose quite a bit. Playing smart helps only to a degree, otherwise LdT, S. Alexander, D. Terrell, E. Smith, etc would still be playing, not to mention Walter Payton, Jim Brown, Franco Harris, OJ, Marcus Allen, etc etc etc

I'm all for having two older RBs on a team.One would be okay, but old RBs rarely make a whole season. But when you sign a former great RB for small money, it's a sign that he is past his prime. Get a year or two out of him, and get someone else. Better to let him go a year early than a year late.

You've illustrated my point. There's a difference between having something and gaining it. I'm not folly to suggest that veteran performance doesn't decline because clearly it does at some point. What I am suggesting is that people need to move away from the stigma of age for the sake of it.