Running Backs are a dime a dozen

[myles2424]

[quote user="lawl"][quote user="GMENAGAIN"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="ny06"]


[quote user="myles2424"]Besides Arian Foster, what DOMINATE RBs were taken after the 3rd round?? Since they're a dime a dozen, I was just curious....[/quote]</P>


Terrell Davis</P>


[/quote] You don't need a dominant running back to win games.[/quote]</P>


What about games in December and January in the Meadowlands??</P>


[/quote] What about them? How'd we do this year? How does green bay do?[/quote]</P>


Feel free to go hang out at the Green Bay board....</P>


Using them as a example to why somehow running game isnt important is ridiculous....</P>


Thats a whole other breed of offense...</P>


49ers....Ravens...Texans... All tuff running game/Defense...</P>

[BlueSanta]

Giants have never been big on "late risers" like Martin either. When they say they got their #2 rated RB I completely believe them.

I think Martin is a good player. But, I do not see him being better than Wilson, never did. Prior to the senior bowl nobody did either. Remember, Wilson wasnt at the senior bowl because he was a junior. So people couldnt compare the 2 head to head. Fact is, on the game film and on the stat sheet Wilson produced more, was more consistent doing it, and did it vs bigger competition.

[Kruunch]

[quote user="lawl"][quote user="GMENAGAIN"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="ny06"]


[quote user="myles2424"]Besides Arian Foster, what DOMINATE RBs were taken after the 3rd round?? Since they're a dime a dozen, I was just curious....[/quote]</P>


Terrell Davis</P>


[/quote] You don't need a dominant running back to win games.[/quote]</P>


What about games in December and January in the Meadowlands??</P>[/quote]

What about them? How'd we do this year? How does green bay do?[/quote]

We were losing until we started rushing for over 100 yards a game.

And what's with the Green Bay love? We've beat them twice the past two times we've played them in the post season and each time our running attack was a large part of those victories.

Dude make sense.

[TroyArcher]

When you pick last it is tough. RB is definitely needed. I don't think AB's feet problems will go away and if he is out who runs the ball? If this guy turns out to be a real break away runner it will open the passing game even more. Of course it all remains to be seen. Jerry Reese and Co. have shut me up for now after some of my prior year complaints.

[Medisleman]

I disagree with you about Nicks and Cruz. Think about it. Since it is a passing league now, doesn't it make more sense to spend your money resigning your best 2 receivers, and save money by drafting your runners? If we draft good quality backs who we don't have to pay highly, then the money can go to receivers.

Makes sense to me!

[pino]

To tivialize the RB position is just silly to me. Apparently you can win the Super Bowl with a 27th ranked defense, so should we not improve our defense then? Of course you can win without a good RB, but having a good RB makes you that much better.

What happens when conditions don't favor the passing game? What if they are doing a good job at pressuring Eli? Covering our WR's? Having a balanced attack is the best you can hope for in an offense. Look at the Patriots; we pressured Brady and what happened? I bet they wish they had Arian Foster then.

Speaking of the Pats, remember when the Pats had Corey Dillion? He was old but it improved their defense by a large margin (from #17 total offense in 2003, to #7 in 2004 and 2005).

[gumby742]

[quote user="pino"]To tivialize the RB position is just silly to me. Apparently you can win the Super Bowl with a 27th ranked defense, so should we not improve our defense then? Of course you can win without a good RB, but having a good RB makes you that much better. What happens when conditions don't favor the passing game? What if they are doing a good job at pressuring Eli? Covering our WR's? Having a balanced attack is the best you can hope for in an offense. Look at the Patriots; we pressured Brady and what happened? I bet they wish they had Arian Foster then. Speaking of the Pats, remember when the Pats had Corey Dillion? He was old but it improved their defense by a large margin (from #17 total offense in 2003, to #7 in 2004 and 2005).[/quote]</P>


I'll take a good oline over a great RB any day of the week.</P>

[TrueBlue@NYC]

[quote user="myles2424"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="GMENAGAIN"][quote user="lawl"][quote user="ny06"]


[quote user="myles2424"]Besides Arian Foster, what DOMINATE RBs were taken after the 3rd round?? Since they're a dime a dozen, I was just curious....[/quote]</P>


Terrell Davis</P>


[/quote] You don't need a dominant running back to win games.[/quote]</P>


What about games in December and January in the Meadowlands??</P>


[/quote] What about them? How'd we do this year? How does green bay do?[/quote]</P>


Feel free to go hang out at the Green Bay board....</P>


Using them as a example to why somehow running game isnt important is ridiculous....</P>


Thats a whole other breed of offense...</P>


49ers....Ravens...Texans... All tuff running game/Defense...</P>


[/quote]</P>


How bout the Giants and Pats this year, or the Saints and Colts in 2009? Or the Cards and Steelers in 2008? </P>


The 2007 Giants were the last top 10 rushing team to be in a SB. </P>


I'm not saying that having a running game isn't important, I believe to win the SB you need at least some balance. But let's not pretend that teams still ride their running games through the playoffs. </P>

[slipknottin]

[quote user="TrueBlue@NYC"]How bout the Giants and Pats this year, or the Saints and Colts in 2009? Or the Cards and Steelers in 2008? </P>


The 2007 Giants were the last top 10 rushing team to be in a SB. [/quote]

Saints had the 6th ranked running game in 2009.

[YATittle1962]

the title of this thread is one of the biggest myths in pro football

every position is a dime a dozen

the good ones are few and far between......and we got ourselves a damn good football player