VABills Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 Well, since his retirement from the National Football League in 1985 he has carved out quite a career. Earl Campbell currently serves as President of Earl Campbell Meat Products, Inc. which proudly manufactures and sells Earl Campbell's ® Smoked Sausage and other wonderful food products and barbeque sauce. Plus since he's over 50 now, he prob wouldn't have gotten that yard either. 771547[/snapback] Well if he is eating that much processed meat he probably looks like the Fridge and easily would have gained the yard. But I tend to agree with Kelly, Lee would have been splattered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 Same old talk about whether or not WM is a top 5 back, and whether or not it was a brilliant move to draft him if it works out... By taking a running back you *know* will be injured the first year of the five years you are paying him for, you should expect him to perform 25% better than comparably drafted backs in years 2-5 to recoup your investment. I havn't seen anything more than average 1st round output. And as a first rounder you get for 4 years but are paying 5 for, an expensive one at that. It was a stupid gamble - we won on his rehab, but got nothing extra for our risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 Same old talk about whether or not WM is a top 5 back, and whether or not it was a brilliant move to draft him if it works out... By taking a running back you *know* will be injured the first year of the five years you are paying him for, you should expect him to perform 25% better than comparably drafted backs in years 2-5 to recoup your investment. I havn't seen anything more than average 1st round output. And as a first rounder you get for 4 years but are paying 5 for, an expensive one at that. It was a stupid gamble - we won on his rehab, but got nothing extra for our risk. 771610[/snapback] You Drones... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROSCOE P. COE TRAIN Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 He would be silly with a top OL. He has 3 different coaches in 4 yrs. Been injured with a cadevors knee in his. He is maturing. His top end speed -- like edge james -- is suspect. He has no burst. But he is still solid. I like having him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 Wide Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 Same old talk about whether or not WM is a top 5 back, and whether or not it was a brilliant move to draft him if it works out... By taking a running back you *know* will be injured the first year of the five years you are paying him for, you should expect him to perform 25% better than comparably drafted backs in years 2-5 to recoup your investment. I havn't seen anything more than average 1st round output. And as a first rounder you get for 4 years but are paying 5 for, an expensive one at that. It was a stupid gamble - we won on his rehab, but got nothing extra for our risk. 771610[/snapback] Do you have to co-sign the checks with Ralphie??? If you don't then what's the difference it got us a legit starting RB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 Do you have to co-sign the checks with Ralphie??? If you don't then what's the difference it got us a legit starting RB 771834[/snapback] The cap is the difference. Money payed to WM while he takes off a year to reab still counts against it. In terms of what you can afford to field, you wind up one good player short for a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 The cap is the difference. Money payed to WM while he takes off a year to reab still counts against it. In terms of what you can afford to field, you wind up one good player short for a year. 771947[/snapback] I don't think that money was the main issue wrt that pick. The Bills were a team with an aging Ruben Brown at LG, and nobody at RG. TD miraculously swindled a #1 for Peerless Price. Instead of taking Steinbach, or even another player to build a team that needed help, and lots of it, he was just so arrogant that he took Willis, and then waited well over a season for him to play. Believe me, I wanted Henry replaced, but he could have done so without using up a 1st round pick, and waiting THAT long. Stupid, arrogant moves like this were the downfall of TD. He made some great moves as GM, but not enough to negate the numerous instances of idiocy, such as the above, MW, and the little teapot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetbaboo Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 He would be silly with a top OL. He has 3 different coaches in 4 yrs. Been injured with a cadevors knee in his. He is maturing. His top end speed -- like edge james -- is suspect. He has no burst. But he is still solid. I like having him. 771770[/snapback] again with this top OL business Drew Bledsoe and Rob Johnson would be Zeus Almighty behind a top O-line even Shaud Williams would be a 2000 yd RB behind a top OL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 again with this top OL business Drew Bledsoe and Rob Johnson would be Zeus Almighty behind a top O-line even Shaud Williams would be a 2000 yd RB behind a top OL 772212[/snapback] You saw how good JP (with all his mobility) looked when there was a jail break on the sack. There was nothing the guy could do. Skill players need an o-line. It is fundamental. Did you see the kind of protection that the Pats were giving Brady and te size of the holes that they were opening up for their RBs? We have some promising skill players on offense. It would be nice if our o-line were just "good." Given the past 10 years of piss poor offensive lines, I would take "good" (as opposed to "top") right now. It would be nice if our guys had half a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 Same old talk about whether or not WM is a top 5 back, and whether or not it was a brilliant move to draft him if it works out... By taking a running back you *know* will be injured the first year of the five years you are paying him for, you should expect him to perform 25% better than comparably drafted backs in years 2-5 to recoup your investment. I haven't seen anything more than average 1st round output. And as a first rounder you get for 4 years but are paying 5 for, an expensive one at that. It was a stupid gamble - we won on his rehab, but got nothing extra for our risk. 771610[/snapback] OK, I should be working but...I like stats. Let's have a look at comparable backs...within 8 picks of WM...picks 15-31. And look at their production in their 2nd to 5th years in the NFL. At this point I have no idea how the figures will turn out but I bet you are wrong. I'll write year then under that player name....ave yardage over years 2-5 & ave TDs over that time. 2004(only 1 year of stats) Steven Jackson 1046-8 Chris Perry 279-0 Kevin Jones 664-5 2003 McGahee 1187.5-9 Larry Johnson 1165.5-14.5 2002 TJ Duckett 556-9 William Green 407.3-1 2001 Deuce Mcallister 1109.5-8.25 Michael Bennett 623-2.5 2000 Shaun Alexander 1406-15 Trung Canidate 363-2.3 1998 Robert Edwards 107-1 John Avery 10.5-0 1997 Antowain Smith 812.25-7.5 1995 Tyrone Wheatley 492.75-3.25 Napolean Kaufman 950.75-2.75 James Stewart 606.5-7.75 Rashaan Salaam 152-1.5 Hmmm, let's see. Only Shaun Alexander has a great yards/year average. And only Johnson & Alexander have a greater TD/year average. 25% better you ask for...let's add em up. The average of all the backs(not including WM) is 632.4 yards per year & 5.25 TDs per year. WM is 188% better than the average in yards & 171% better in TDs. Either way you look at it....direct comparison(only 2 better) or averages, WM has so far panned out as a decent pick....in relation to comparable RBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbills17 Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 For the past couple of years, opposing defenses have been stacking the box to try to stop our rushing attack. 770521[/snapback] Funny this article says the same thing many of us have been saying ... http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/article...ills140906.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 Funny this article says the same thing many of us have been saying ...http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/article...ills140906.html 773307[/snapback] You are right. The article is funny. I laughed out loud when I read it. He also sounds like the "many of us" to whom you refer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 Funny this article says the same thing many of us have been saying ...http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/article...ills140906.html 773307[/snapback] what can we say? trolls stick together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 Funny this article says the same thing many of us have been saying ...http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/article...ills140906.html 773307[/snapback] I stopped when he said Larry Johnson played basically half a season. LJ had the 6th most carries, 11 more than Willis, and 3 less than LT, and only 24 less than the most in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 Either way you look at it....direct comparison(only 2 better) or averages, WM has so far panned out as a decent pick....in relation to comparable RBs. 772346[/snapback] I find the numbers surprising... I stand by my position that his cumulative yardage contribution over the length of the contract should meet the norm for his slot, and you've shown he is on the pace to compensate for the lost year. Ok, I'll buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts