Peter Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 All of the very best running backs in the league, Alexander, LT, Johnson, Barber, Portis, etc., do not just run hard into the line every play. Each of them, for the most part, are pretty patient runners that look for holes, cut and then run hard. When they see space they run hard. So does Willis. When they don't, they stop, they cut back, they reverse field. They are a little quicker than Willis is at it right now but they all do the same thing. Travis Henry runs hard to the hole every play and is second string. 770176[/snapback] Thank you. You are exactly correct. It is obvious that there are some people on this board who either have never played running back and/or know very little about the position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 willis no heart?????????? he only says they need to win for the city of buffalo, jumps in the stands after TDs and loves our fans...he DOES run with purpose... he played amazing in the first half, and the line didnt open up any holes in the second half...he isnt superman, and cant do it all himself you forget the play where he turned a loss into a 20 yrd gain, he had a lot of great runs in the first half... he missed a 4th and 1...and everyone hates him????? Please people 770184[/snapback] Post of the day anyone??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbills17 Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Thank you. You are exactly correct. It is obvious that there are some people on this board who either have never played running back and/or know very little about the position. 770186[/snapback] And I would place you in that group. It's the same song and dance with Willis every time - he has no holes. Give it up people. It doesn't matter who he is running behind, he is simply not near as good as Bills fans seem to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 And I would place you in that group. It's the same song and dance with Willis every time - he has no holes. Give it up people. It doesn't matter who he is running behind, he is simply not near as good as Bills fans seem to think. 770191[/snapback] If I respected your opinion on this issue, I might care. Guess what? I don't care. You and some of the others can try to run Willis out of town with your pitch forks. I will have no part of it. The problem with this team is not Willis. Believe whatever you want to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 And I would place you in that group. It's the same song and dance with Willis every time - he has no holes. Give it up people. It doesn't matter who he is running behind, he is simply not near as good as Bills fans seem to think. 770191[/snapback] Why is it not possible to trade fans ... jeez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Post of the day anyone??? 770190[/snapback] I second your nomination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Why is it not possible to trade fans ... jeez 770198[/snapback] ignore the troll. he adds nothing to discussion about any bills topic except for trashing them. take a look back through the trolls posts. give it time. when ew win a few games, these tards will go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbills17 Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 ignore the troll. he adds nothing to discussion about any bills topic except for trashing them. take a look back through the trolls posts. give it time. when ew win a few games, these tards will go away. 770200[/snapback] Yes, look through my old posts. Where have I ever 'trashed' the Bills? I am not jumping on Willis for 1 game, or 1 play. I have maintained he is not the RB you people all cling to who dominated college ball, and I've been consistent. NCAA is not NFL, especially WM with nowhere near the same speed he once had. I've played and watched football all my life and I am as die-hard a Bills fan as you will find. But I also evaluate our players objectively, and I see WM as an average RB, who is never going to be great, let alone the 'best in the NFL'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Yes, look through my old posts. Where have I ever 'trashed' the Bills? I am not jumping on Willis for 1 game, or 1 play. I have maintained he is not the RB you people all cling to who dominated college ball, and I've been consistent. NCAA is not NFL, especially WM with nowhere near the same speed he once had. I've played and watched football all my life and I am as die-hard a Bills fan as you will find. But I also evaluate our players objectively, and I see WM as an average RB, who is never going to be great, let alone the 'best in the NFL'. 770206[/snapback] Well he was top 4-5 in the league, the 2nd half of 2004 and he was top 3-4 in the league in the 1st half of 2005 ... so that kinda sucks your theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Yes, look through my old posts. Where have I ever 'trashed' the Bills? I am not jumping on Willis for 1 game, or 1 play. I have maintained he is not the RB you people all cling to who dominated college ball, and I've been consistent. NCAA is not NFL, especially WM with nowhere near the same speed he once had. I've played and watched football all my life and I am as die-hard a Bills fan as you will find. But I also evaluate our players objectively, and I see WM as an average RB, who is never going to be great, let alone the 'best in the NFL'. 770206[/snapback] Sounds to me like you made your mind up early on what WM will be able to achieve (post injury) & you're sticking to it. You can't honestly be saying(because you certainly are implying) that having a top OL does not affect the stats of a RB(& a teams running game). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 flea noun: any wingless blood-sucking parasitic insect noted for ability to leap. (apparently, to conclusions) http://www.onelook.com/?loc=pub&w=flea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbills17 Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Well he was top 4-5 in the league, the 2nd half of 2004 and he was top 3-4 in the league in the 1st half of 2005 ... so that kinda sucks your theory. 770209[/snapback] That is pure BS. Willis has never been a top 5 RB, in any year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 That is pure BS. Willis has never been a top 5 RB, in any year. 770219[/snapback] You are 100% correct. In 2004 he would have been #6 in the NFL if he had started all 16 games. WM 2004 stats 284-1128 13TDs 5 non starting games 35-128 0TDs 11 starting games 249 1000 13TDs Averaged to 16 games 362 1455 19TDs That would have placed him.... #6 in yards #1 in TDs ....but technically you are correct.....not a top 5 back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 That is pure BS. Willis has never been a top 5 RB, in any year. 770219[/snapback] Or we could take his stats from the last 8 games of 2004 (which is what daquixers said).... 193-787 11TDs Double that for a full 16 game season..... 386-1574 22TDs That would place him.... #4 in yards #1 in TDs Never let the facts get in the way of a good opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKC Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Willis simply said out loud what dozens and dozens of players feel and think and totally believe. 770059[/snapback] Doesn't that mean that Willis said out loud what dozens and dozens of other players have had the good sense to clamp up on? For my money I thought McGahee looked like he might have a very big year, and except for the handicap we have at FB he has the support to pull it off (a better run blocking line, a much better change-up back to give him a blow). NE has (IMO wisely) used the draft to build maybe the league's best run stopping rotation in their D interior. I won't judge WM on his final stats againt the Pat's D. Next week might be more telling, with the far longer in the tooth Keith Traylor hoping to find 4 quarters in the tank. I also couldn't care that he's obviously a moron, because for the most part that usually doesn't affect play at his position. I do have a problem with the fact that he DID allow his idiocy to affect the biggest play of the game yesterday; while I didn't like the 4th down play call, his lack of awareness may truly be the reason we didn't make it. He did a slight foot shuffle on the way to the line on that play and with him assuming it was a 3rd down and looking for the bigger play he may very well have sacrificed the short yardage gain and the game in the overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbills17 Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 You are 100% correct.In 2004 he would have been #6 in the NFL if he had started all 16 games. WM 2004 stats 284-1128 13TDs 5 non starting games 35-128 0TDs 11 starting games 249 1000 13TDs Averaged to 16 games 362 1455 19TDs That would have placed him.... #6 in yards #1 in TDs ....but technically you are correct.....not a top 5 back. 770223[/snapback] Also not a top 10 back. You people with your stats are hopeless. Why don't you talk about his receiving stats or total yards? How about his yards per carry? How about taking into account how many teams employ RB by commitee and the fact that you are calculating his 'projected' stats while being the RB that got 90% of the carries (a rarity in this league)? He was average then, and average now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDRupp Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Talent and winning? Has McGahee really done anything that great in the league yet? He did say he was the best RB in the NFL last year, I guess that was nice. He's a decent running back so far. That's about it. If the coaching staff thinks they can win with him, then I'll take their word for it. I don't think we have to get rid of him ASAP but I'm definitely not high on the guy at all. 769974[/snapback] Agree almost fully with a slight difference. McGahee is moderately better than average. Playing devils advocate with myself is that what Larry Johnson is too now that his great OT's from last year are gone? I think OL is a huge determinant as to how an RB plays/looks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Also not a top 10 back. You people with your stats are hopeless. 770234[/snapback] Ummm, the stats show #6Why don't you talk about his receiving stats or total yards?How about his yards per carry? 770234[/snapback] Why don't you give us some criteria on what makes a top RB rather than simply say he is rubbish as if all of the other backs that actually did outperform him would do better running behind the Bills OL.How about taking into account how many teams employ RB by commitee....770234[/snapback] You're not saying that RBs used in a RB by committee setup are top RBs are you? RB by committee means..."we don't have a top RB" He was average then, and average now. 770234[/snapback] Ummm....OK....if you say so. There are two differences between you & myself. 1. You put forward a point of view without bothering to back it up with any reasonable arguments...."because I say so" is not a reasonable argument. 2. You hold firm opinions & put them forwards as facts on things which cannot be determined at this point in time. I actually think you could be correct about WM. I also think you may well be incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 ......I think OL is a huge determinant as to how an RB plays/looks. 770236[/snapback] Fully agree. It baffles me how that line is not considered a no-brainer by anyone who has the ability to turn on a computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Also not a top 10 back. You people with your stats are hopeless. Why don't you talk about his receiving stats or total yards? How about his yards per carry? How about taking into account how many teams employ RB by commitee and the fact that you are calculating his 'projected' stats while being the RB that got 90% of the carries (a rarity in this league)? He was average then, and average now. 770234[/snapback] Who says a RB has to be a receiver to be a great back? Barry Sanders averaged 2.3 receptions for his career. Is Willis as good as Barry? Obviously not but again see my first question Yards per carry is a great topic, LaDainian Tomlinson whose widely considered the most complete RB in the game today averaged 3.9 yards per rush last season, McGahee averaged 3.8. In terms of committee, let's look at the top RBs. Again I start with LT. He had 339 rush attempts in comparison San Diego's 2nd RB Michael Turner had 57 attempts. Shaun Alexander had 370 rush attempts in comparison Seattle's 2nd RB Maurice Morris had 71 attempts. All that said, I feel McGahee is overrated by some Bills fans but feel is a better than average RB in this league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts