Zeke is looking scary good

[Aviano90]

If a guy is getting half or less carries I expect the efficiency to be higher.. You comparing 4.1 ypc over 76 carries vs 242 does not sway this in Randles favor. And you know very well Zeke was not at his best last year so again this only goes in favor of Zeke.

And if Zeke is leading the league in rushing I expect Dak to take advantage of that and allow our receivers to have their best games of their career like Dez did when Murray had 1800 yards. If that happens then maybe Zeke can get the 1800 instead of 1600 like you demand. And Zeke was never on pace for anything under 1572 yards at any point in his career, so why you're pulling 1400 out of thin air, who knows. Zeke is no Eddie George like you make it sound.

It’s simole math, man. That’s all it is. Don’t have time to explain it to you, but if you want Zeke to average 4.1 yards a carry instead of 5.1 yards per carry this year then I don’t know what to tell you.

 

[InTheZone]

It’s simole math, man. That’s all it is. Don’t have time to explain it to you, but if you want Zeke to average 4.1 yards a carry instead of 5.1 yards per carry this year then I don’t know what to tell you.

And words are randomly thrown in my mouth

 

[Aviano90]

And words are randomly thrown in my mouth

Then let’s make it simple. Do you want Zeke to be more efficient with his carries this year or not?

 

[INCowboysFan]

Outside of 2017, we've had 4 years of 1,000+ rushers.

McFadden and Murray got 1,000 yards behind this line. Morris would have topped 1,000 on LESS CARRIES PER GAME than Elliott if he started from week 1.

3 out of the last 5 seasons, we missed the playoffs. Having a good back is a benefit, it is however NOT going to take us over the top. I get excited over lineman and quarterbacks. Not wide receivers and running backs.

John Elway vehemently disagrees with this.

 

[mattjames2010]

No, they weren't.

Stats? Hey, I'm a stats guy myself, but you have to look at the big pic if you want a real idea of what a RB is bringing to the table.

No one ever said that all it takes is a RB.

You sure seem to be obsessed w/ this 1,000 yd back thingie.

Zeke could indeed take us over the top, but not by himself. Need a D and good play from the QB.

That's the point, you're going to need a great defense and great QB play. That's when the RB starts to matter....

If an RB was that important, it would make up for these other positions. That's simply not the case, having a great WR and RB should be viewed as luxuries now.

Him "tearing it up" at camp doesn't matter. What Gregory and our rookie DE are doing is far more important and far more impactful.

 

[mattjames2010]

Lol, what?

My post isn't difficult to understand.

Need a coloring book?

 

[cern]

Then let’s make it simple. Do you want Zeke to be more efficient with his carries this year or not?

if we have a solid lead late in the game and are controlling top by moving the chains, i'd sit him. but if the backups can't continue to move the chains, I put him back in. rb's hate it because late in the games they're more prone to break long runs against worn out defenses. but i'd prefer to prolong his career.

 

[mattjames2010]

John Elway vehemently disagrees with this.

John Elway played in a league with different rules - the game in 1999 is nowhere near the same as 2018.

Show me the amount of teams that either reached the Super Bowl or won it the past 15 years with a superstar RB.

 

[CyberB0b]

John Elway played in a league with different rules - the game in 1999 is nowhere near the same as 2018.

Show me the amount of teams that either reached the Super Bowl or won it the past 15 years with a superstar RB.

I can't even name 5 superstar running backs in the league right now.

 

[G2]

My post isn't difficult to understand.

Need a coloring book?

I disagree with it. Have a snickers.

 

[keysersoze]

Report them.

What good will that do? Apparently they’re protected. The mods see the same posts we see. It’s not rocket science

 

[Doomsday101]

John Elway played in a league with different rules - the game in 1999 is nowhere near the same as 2018.

Show me the amount of teams that either reached the Super Bowl or won it the past 15 years with a superstar RB.

Seahawks with Lynch. Seahawks passing number that year were towards the bottom of the league. Wilson avoided turnovers but seahawks leaned a lot of Lynch winning 1 SB and should have won the 2nd had they ran the ball down at the one with lynch instead of throwing a slant that was picked off.

 

[kskboys]

That's the point, you're going to need a great defense and great QB play. That's when the RB starts to matter....

If an RB was that important, it would make up for these other positions. That's simply not the case, having a great WR and RB should be viewed as luxuries now.

Him "tearing it up" at camp doesn't matter. What Gregory and our rookie DE are doing is far more important and far more impactful.

Camp is irrelevant, yes.

However, I still disagree that it doesn't matter. There's a reason NE put up w/ Blount's BS. They needed that tough yds RB.

Ray Rice, Marshawn Lynch, Blount, all were major factors in their team's super bowl runs, and there's a good chance that their teams don't win w/o them. Blount was a beast in Philly's super bowl win last year. Didn't have many yds leading up to it, but 2 TD's in two games and one in the super bowl.

I think you're simply falling for that ridiculous notion that was going round a couple years ago that the RB position doesn't matter. That's actually been disproven, you know, though some are still desperately hanging on to it.

 

[Big_D]

John Elway played in a league with different rules - the game in 1999 is nowhere near the same as 2018.

Show me the amount of teams that either reached the Super Bowl or won it the past 15 years with a superstar RB.

But not too many teams have this line or RB. Things change and history repeats itself. I rather have those 6 than not have them. Of course the D and the QB play needs to imrove, but they don't need to be ‘great’ to win. The team as a whole needs to be above average and put it all together at the same time. I don’t think any area has to be greater than the next. Quality play from O, D & ST. Plus quality coaching and minimal mistakes. That formula can be capable of competing and winning in the postseason!

 

[TwoDeep3]

I don't. I think he was selfish and when an entire team depends on you to be there and your not I think it's selfish. Even with all he was dealing with. He had the **** you mentality and you could see it. This year he has the redemption mentality and you could see it.

I think your position on Zeke and being selfish is an out of touch comment that has no thought behind it.

Let's see you in a fishbowl on a national stage with a major sports organization trying to cuff you for six weeks, and every major sports TV venue reminds the entire football world at every juncture what a bad guy you are, even though the police and investigator of the NFL said there is nothing there to see.

Now do that at 21 or 22 years old.

There is an expression, before you judge, walk a mile in the other guy's shoes. You didn't even put on his socks.

Ridiculous post.

 

[kskboys]

John Elway played in a league with different rules - the game in 1999 is nowhere near the same as 2018.

Show me the amount of teams that either reached the Super Bowl or won it the past 15 years with a superstar RB.

OK, I gotta go to work, but just off the top of my head:

Philly: Blount
NE: Blount
SEA: Lynch
DEN: Anderson
BALT: Rice


I know you'll argue now about the definition of super star, and that's fine, but these guys were instrumental in their team's super bowl wins. Starks was instrumental in GB's SB run, as was Pierre Thomas in NO's.

And it's not the super star that is needed, it's the tough yds RB. Grit, not flash.

 

[mattjames2010]

Seahawks with Lynch. Seahawks passing number that year were towards the bottom of the league. Wilson avoided turnovers but seahawks leaned a lot of Lynch winning 1 SB and should have won the 2nd had they ran the ball down at the one with lynch instead of throwing a slant that was picked off.

Seahawks had an historic defense and had 35 yards rushing in the Super Bowl where the Seahawks dominated the Broncos. Thanks for proving my point, you also pointed out 1 RB the past 15 years. The Seahawks were a complete team and won a Super Bowl by having a historic defense that shut down a historic offense.

You don't win Super Bowls with running backs.

 

[Zekeats]

Fat and lazy? Lmao. That's cute.

The investigation wore on him mentally. That's what it was. He wasn't lazy. That's just silly.

I think your position on Zeke and being selfish is an out of touch comment that has no thought behind it.

Let's see you in a fishbowl on a national stage with a major sports organization trying to cuff you for six weeks, and every major sports TV venue reminds the entire football world at every juncture what a bad guy you are, even though the police and investigator of the NFL said there is nothing there to see.

Now do that at 21 or 22 years old.

There is an expression, before you judge, walk a mile in the other guy's shoes. You didn't even put on his socks.

Ridiculous post.

Why would I put dirty socks and shoes on when my feet are clean?

 

[mattjames2010]

OK, I gotta go to work, but just off the top of my head:

Philly: Blount
NE: Blount
SEA: Lynch
DEN: Anderson
BALT: Rice


I know you'll argue now about the definition of super star, and that's fine, but these guys were instrumental in their team's super bowl wins. Starks was instrumental in GB's SB run, as was Pierre Thomas in NO's.

And it's not the super star that is needed, it's the tough yds RB. Grit, not flash.

LOL what the hell? Philly had a two back system, Blount and Ajayi. I already addressed Lynch. Denver won the Super Bowl because they also had a historic defense, Anderson was also a middling RB. Rice topped 100 yards ONCE in 4 games in their playoff run and was mediocre in the super bowl.

 

[mattjames2010]

But not too many teams have this line or RB. Things change and history repeats itself. I rather have those 6 than not have them. Of course the D and the QB play needs to imrove, but they don't need to be ‘great’ to win. The team as a whole needs to be above average and put it all together at the same time. I don’t think any area has to be greater than the next. Quality play from O, D & ST. Plus quality coaching and minimal mistakes. That formula can be capable of competing and winning in the postseason!

We've had this line since 2014 and haven't got past the divisional round. We had an RB that topped 1,800 yards and 1,600 yards and couldn't get past the Packers.

You don't get much better at RB than those performances. Again, you do not win Super Bowls with touted RBs. History since rule changes shows this.

You need a great QB and a great defense. Why are people even arguing against this? I have no idea.