Started By
Message
re: WDE24's Top 5 SEC Running Backs - Watch List
Posted on 5/31/13 at 12:29 am to CrimsonFever
Posted on 5/31/13 at 12:29 am to CrimsonFever
You Bama fans have really struggled in this thread. Thank you for the comedy 
0
Posted on 5/31/13 at 12:42 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
Gurley
Yeldon
Everybody else
Yeldon
Everybody else
Posted on 5/31/13 at 1:17 am to RockyMtnTigerWDE
Add Corey Grant, so I can laugh. Please.
Posted on 5/31/13 at 6:04 am to WDE24
Player - Fowler
Why? He is proven, unlike many on your list. Higher YPC than all three previous Bama RBs, four if TJ is included.
Preemptive rebuttal - Yes he had knee surgery, but since you foolishly disregarded that last year in naming Davis and Lattimore to your top 5, I expect same formula to be used this year.
Preemptive rebuttal #2 - Yes his carries have come as a backup, same as Trent and Lacy before him. How did they turn out?
..........#3 - True, he won't be a starter at RB position unless there is injury. Most people agree that Yeldon was top five in league last year, although not a starter. Same With Trent two years earlier, both Ingram and Trent were top 5.
Fowler deserves to be on the WDE24 watch list, to deny him would be irresponsible.
eta... Without the knee problem, I would fully endorse Fowler as a top 5 guy. Personally I believe he will have to prove himself again due to injury.
Why? He is proven, unlike many on your list. Higher YPC than all three previous Bama RBs, four if TJ is included.
Preemptive rebuttal - Yes he had knee surgery, but since you foolishly disregarded that last year in naming Davis and Lattimore to your top 5, I expect same formula to be used this year.
Preemptive rebuttal #2 - Yes his carries have come as a backup, same as Trent and Lacy before him. How did they turn out?
..........#3 - True, he won't be a starter at RB position unless there is injury. Most people agree that Yeldon was top five in league last year, although not a starter. Same With Trent two years earlier, both Ingram and Trent were top 5.
Fowler deserves to be on the WDE24 watch list, to deny him would be irresponsible.
eta... Without the knee problem, I would fully endorse Fowler as a top 5 guy. Personally I believe he will have to prove himself again due to injury.
This post was edited on 5/31/13 at 6:10 am
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:10 am to scrooster
quote:It is like this board is full of monkeys that can't understand the simple concept of making the case for or against a person to be on the list. Nothing in the op indicated the list was perfect, complete or final. In fact, the entire purpose and tone of the op, spelled out in plain English, was requesting assistance in compiling a better list.
Four pages and still no Mike Davis or Brandon Wilds on the list.
List is invalidated. I should not have had to waste my time even posting in this thread in an effort to bring attention to your negligence.
However, true to form, you ignorant mouth breathing motherfrickers can't turn off your defensiveness for one thread to just talk football. This was an open invitation for discussion.
Quit being so small minded.
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:11 am to CrimsonFever
quote:Not at all.
It's a troll list,
quote:No there were not.
there originally were 3 Auburn RBs on it.
quote:The story of board full of too many fricking morons incapable of having a discussion about football running backs.
The downvotes on the OP tell the story.
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:14 am to bona fide
quote:I want to add Fowler simply for the fact that you read the op and you followed the request with a reasonable argument for a guy.
bona fide
My argument against Fowler, similar to that against Drake and Henry, is not that they aren't capable of making this list, it is that they will split the carries that Yeldon earned last year.
However, I also think that Bama, due to a mundane schedule, will likely have lots of garbage time to split carries among the back ups. The difficulty then becomes how to grade the work done by RBs in garbage time or against far inferior opponents.
I'm still mulling whether or not to add the Bama back ups to the list. I really don't see any of them getting enough touches to make the list, but they all have the talent so what is the harm in being on the watch list.
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:16 am to WDE24
quote:
It is like this board is full of monkeys that can't understand the simple concept of making the case for or against a person to be on the list
This sounds like your argument on the poli board, about people being "paranoid" that the current administration was about power, and not about the interests of the country.
quote:
However, true to form, you ignorant mouth breathing motherfrickers can't turn off your defensiveness for one thread to just talk football
Seems you're the one being defensive. You have no criteria that is consistent, and you're getting angry that people are giving reasons behind their choices. Simmer down, and open your mind for a change and get over the madness.
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:21 am to Alahunter
quote:Never once made that argument. Your inability to read understand the English language is astounding.
This sounds like your argument on the poli board, about people being "paranoid" that the current administration was about power, and not about the interests of the country.
The fact that you think Eric Holder was the mastermind to the OKC bombings and that he killed a man in prison due to mistaken identity leads me to call you paranoid.
quote:No, I am mad.
Seems you're the one being defensive.
quote:My criteria is very consistent. The top 5 will be a list of RBs in the SEC who have performed best on the field despite what their hype or perceived ability is. Therefore, if the most talented RB doesn't get to play due to injury, red shirt, etc. they don't stay at the top of the list.
You have no criteria that is consistent
It takes into account all on field factors including level of competition. This watch list is merely a list of players that have a reasonable chance to make the list.
quote:No, I get angry at the people that make blanket statements without giving reasons or they can't follow instructions. Everyone that has named a player and given a reason for that player's inclusion or exclusion has received a thoughtful response.
you're getting angry that people are giving reasons behind their choices.
quote:My mind is open and has been throughout the thread.
open your mind for a change
quote:Ok, I am over it.
get over the madness.
This post was edited on 5/31/13 at 9:23 am
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:24 am to WDE24
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:26 am to Alahunter
quote:
Alahunter
So do you think your Center this year should be on the Rimington watch list? Did he accomplish anything last year?
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:26 am to WDE24
quote:
Never once made that argument
quote:
No, I am mad.
quote:
My criteria is very consistent. The top 5 will be a list of RBs in the SEC who have performed best on the field despite what their hype or perceived ability is. Therefore, if the most talented RB doesn't get to play due to injury, red shirt, etc. they don't stay at the top of the list. It takes into account all on field factors including level of competition. This watch list is merely a list of players that have a reasonable chance to make the list
Other than the fact, you leave some off, thinking they may or may not get the ball, and including a host on the same team, when most may or not get the ball, yeah, sure, you're consistent.
quote:
No, I get angry at the people that make blanket statements without giving reasons or they can't follow instructions. Everyone that has named a player and given a reason for that player's inclusion or exclusion has received a thoughtful response.
quote:
My mind is open and has been throughout the thread
Clearly.
quote:
too many fricking morons
quote:
board is full of monkeys
quote:
ignorant mouth breathing motherfrickers
This post was edited on 5/31/13 at 9:28 am
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:27 am to Alahunter
quote:
when most may or not get the ball
Here lies the answer to your problem
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:28 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
NYCAuburn
quote:
So do you think your Center this year should be on the Rimington watch list?
No.
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:28 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
Here lies the answer to your problem
How so? How can someone be on the list, when it's just as possible they could be 3rd or 4th string?
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:29 am to Alahunter
Give me a link where I have made any such statement on the poli baord. Good luck. Your problem is that you don't read what is written, but what you assume to be the underlying message behind what is written. It is just more of your paranoia showing. You can't deal with the words on the page so you interpret them to fit your paranoid mind set.
quote:This has been explained over and over. I don't think AU will have more than one person that makes the Top 5 list. They may not even have 1. However, there is no clear definitive number one, so including a couple makes more sense. Additionally, if there was someone on the list you thought didn't belong, all you had to do was name their name and state why and they could be removed. There were two that were added to the list just for humor's sake. However, you never could follow the simple instructions.
Other than the fact, you leave some off, thinking they may or may not get the ball, and including a host on the same team, when most may or not get the ball, yeah, sure, you're consistent.
quote:There have been multiple names added to the list and at least one removed due to suggestions that followed the instructions of the OP.
Clearly.
This post was edited on 5/31/13 at 9:32 am
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:30 am to Alahunter
quote:
How so? How can someone be on the list, when it's just as possible they could be 3rd or 4th string?
Is it just as possible that they could be 1st string?
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:33 am to Alahunter
quote:If you think someone should be on the list or shouldn't NAME THEIR NAME AND MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT. It is very simple, but you can't seem to follow directions.
How so? How can someone be on the list, when it's just as possible they could be 3rd or 4th string?
I was actually wanting to take Grant and Barber off the list from the beginning, but no one was willing to follow simple instructions.
This post was edited on 5/31/13 at 9:34 am
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:34 am to WDE24
quote:
I don't think AU will have more than one person that makes the Top 5 list. They may not even have 1. However, there is no clear definitive number one, so included a couple makes more sense
How does including multiple RB's, who may not even make the 1st string, reason into them being a potential top 5 for the conference? It's kinda bad logic, to say, 3 or 4 players could be top 5 in the league, when any given one may not even be a starter.
quote:
It is just more of your paranoia showing. You can't deal with the words on the page so you interpret them to fit your paranoid mind set.
Please. Your naivety shows no bounds.
Posted on 5/31/13 at 9:36 am to Alahunter
quote:Because they play in an offense that consistently has a RB vying for a top 5 spot. Thus, if whichever one gets the majority of the carries has a good chance to be on the list. However, it is an unknown which will likely get the majority of the carries.
How does including multiple RB's, who may not even make the 1st string, reason into them being a potential top 5 for the conference? It's kinda bad logic, to say, 3 or 4 players could be top 5 in the league, when any given one may not even be a starter.
quote:lol
Your naivety shows no bounds.
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News