Ezekiel Elliott Appreciation Thread merged

THEHEREAFTER · Oct 2, 2016

Somebody PLEASE.. complain about the "feed me" gesture as he was gashing the 49'ers and inspiring his team. Go ahead!!

Nightman · Oct 2, 2016

Texas_Pete said:

All top 5 picks

Toruk_Makto · Oct 2, 2016

TheRomoSexual said:
"History" is most recently not on your side. Your argument would be valid if Zeke would have fallen far in the draft. But I'm confident he would have been taken top 10, just like Gurley and Gordon were taken top 15 last year, and just like Fournette will be taken high next year. There was a brief, recent period in which NFL teams didn't draft RBs high, and that trend is shifting the other way because teams are winning on the backs of RBs. Oh, and did you ever think that the brief period in which RBs weren't taken high maybe, just maybe, had more to do with the prospects and not the position itself?

Teams are winning on the backs of RBs? Really?

Please explain to me the correlation in passing differential and winning vs rushing differntial and winning. Facts my man. Facts.

Hardline · Oct 2, 2016

I hate to tell all you Zeke critics I told you so...But I told you so. I even told you so months before the draft.
I was telling you all what kind of RB he was gonna be and I was telling you all Zeke was going to be the pick even when you all was bound and determined to tell me otherwise.

TheRomoSexual · Oct 2, 2016

Toruk_Makto said:
Teams are winning on the backs of RBs? Really?

Please explain to me the correlation in passing differential and winning vs rushing differntial and winning. Facts my man. Facts.

Facts are you claim that RBs aren't taken high, yet two were taken high last year, one was taken high this year, and one will be taken high next year. So, does your argument really hold water when there are four exceptions in a three year period?

BermyStar · Oct 2, 2016

TheRomoSexual said:
Facts are you claim that RBs aren't taken high, yet two were taken high last year, one was taken high this year, and one will be taken high next year. So, does your argument really hold water when there are four exceptions in a three year period?

Could be more than one next year. Good point.

Nightman · Oct 2, 2016

TheRomoSexual said:
Facts are you claim that RBs aren't taken high, yet two were taken high last year, one was taken high this year, and one will be taken high next year. So, does your argument really hold water when there are four exceptions in a three year period?

Don't forget DCook and McCaffery

CalPolyTechnique · Oct 2, 2016

TheRomoSexual said:
Facts are you claim that RBs aren't taken high, yet two were taken high last year, one was taken high this year, and one will be taken high next year. So, does your argument really hold water when there are four exceptions in a three year period?

There you go reframing the debate.

It's not whether RBs should be drafted high (i.e. Top 10), but rather if they should be based on mounds of historical data showing you get productive RBs elsewhere.

theogt · Oct 2, 2016

Remember those threads calling for Morris to start?

LOL.

TheRomoSexual · Oct 2, 2016

bkight13 said:
Don't forget DCook and McCaffery

BermyStar said:
Could be more than one next year. Good point.

Yup. I should have said "at least" one.

TheRomoSexual · Oct 2, 2016

CalPolyTechnique said:
There you go reframing the debate.

It's not whether RBs should be drafted high (i.e. Top 10), but rather if they should be based on mounds of historical data showing you get productive RBs elsewhere.

That's literally not at all what Alexander and I are talking about. Just let the adults talk, okay?

JIGGYFLY · Oct 2, 2016

Toruk_Makto said:
Teams are winning on the backs of RBs? Really?

Please explain to me the correlation in passing differential and winning vs rushing differntial and winning. Facts my man. Facts.

Name the teams that are winning on the backs of top 5 CB picks?

I would have had no issue taking Ramsey but I hate to read weak arguments like this.

It could easily be argued that we have gotten Ramsey production out of Brown so far.

CalPolyTechnique · Oct 2, 2016

TheRomoSexual said:
That's literally not at all what Alexander and I are talking about. Just let the adults talk, okay?

Oh, of course it's not. Because once you get your point taken down, you shift and reframe the debate.

You're a toy.

Toruk_Makto · Oct 2, 2016

erod said:
Anthony Brown is outplaying Ramsey.

You are entitled to your own opinion. But not your own facts.

RomoFor6 · Oct 2, 2016

KB1122 said:
I know. 150 last week. 140 this week. He's obviously good. But I'm not convinced he's top-5-draft-pick-good. He lacks the Dorsett burst. He had 140 yards. But the holes were gigantic and with better breakaway speed he should have had 180-200, maybe more, with a couple of touchdowns. There were at least three big runs where a top-5 talent should have turned on the jets and scored. There was one on the drive where Dorsett would have scored easily. Smith would have been tackled inside the five. I think McFadden would have scored.

I can't complain too much, because he's obviously productive. But he strikes me as a quality third-round mudder that we used an elite draft pick on. I think I might rather have Buckner and the right third-round back. I'm just not convinced that he's worth the draft capital we spent on him.

Just MO. Figure it's an interesting conversation.

lmao you gotta love these type of "fans"

TheRomoSexual · Oct 2, 2016

Toruk_Makto said:
You are entitled to your own opinion. But not your own facts.

Why don't you present facts to refute him? Through four games, Ramsey doesn't have a single int or even PD. Pretty much what he was in college -- a non-playmaker.

rockj7 · Oct 2, 2016

revospeed said:
Meanwhile, Phillip Dorsett toasted Jalen Ramsey today.

Sassy talking Jalen lol FSU and their alumni not fairing to well this weekend

JIGGYFLY · Oct 2, 2016

CalPolyTechnique said:
There you go reframing the debate.

It's not whether RBs should be drafted high (i.e. Top 10), but rather if they should be based on mounds of historical data showing you get productive RBs elsewhere.

The same data shows you can get productive CB play as well.

TheRomoSexual · Oct 2, 2016

CalPolyTechnique said:
Oh, of course it's not. Because once you get your point taken down, you shift and reframe the debate.

You're a toy.

haha, oh sweetie, don't think I didn't see you radically edit your post. That's so cute.

RomoFor6 · Oct 2, 2016

Texas_Pete said:
He had a 30+ yard TD called back too. Should have easily had 200 yards today. It's coming though!

I don't remember that? When???

Ezekiel Elliott Appreciation Thread **merged**

Well-Known Member

Capologist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Capologist

Well-Known Member

Surrealist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Ezekiel Elliott Appreciation Thread merged