Who will start: Suggs or Droughns? - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Who will start: Suggs or Droughns?

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby maddog60 » Mon Jul 11, 2005 3:36 am

ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:Suggs ypc IS worse. And I DID look it up. Droughns 4.5 Suggs 3.7. I don't come into a debate without ammo. You should try it.


Except that we were comparing their ypc in 3rd down situations. And in 3rd down situations they both had a 3.4 ypc. Of course Droughns seasonal ypc was higher. He was running behind the Denver O-line. Denver is one of the game's elite run blocking lines, whereas Cleveland is quite possibly worst offensive line in the NFL. 4.5 ypc behind the Denver line isn't much of a feat (see Davis, Gary, Anderson, Portis). Try arguing the point, which I'll repeat as it probably got lost in all of this: Suggs is a better RB in 3rd down situations, instead of changing the subject when the facts are against you.

I didn't say no knowledge of the game. I said no knowledge of the elements in the equation. And if you admit to not having the necessary knowledge, why feel the need to speak on it as if you do?


You're exact words were "Learn football." That directly implies that I don't have any knowledge of the game of football, otherwise why would I need to learn it? If you don't understand how your words imply that, too bad. I'd gladly give English lessons, but they're not free.

Watching a player is not necessary in making speculations (which we're both doing) as to their usage will be. And I have seen Droughns play, just haven't seen much of him. His size, the scheme of running he's had success in, better power runners available that the team didn't at least try to acquire, and the fact that the other back on the roster is a better 3rd down back, all contribute to a very logical assumption, that he was not brought in to Cleveland to be their 3rd down back. That's more than sufficient to make the argument as to what his usage in Cleveland will be.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said size had nothing to do with style. Strength does however, and you'll notice I mentioned that, or perhaps not--you ignored it.


And you have a way of measuring strength in RBs? Can you pull up their bench press totals from the off-season to show who is stronger? Maybe squat totals too, since those demonstrate leg power, and that's necessary for staying on your feet while running through another player.

Exactly where did you bring up strength before? You say that Suggs is shifty and Droughns is a power-running back, but you dont have anything to back it up, other than your own personal observations, which are inheritantly inaccurate for a variety of reasons that all personal observations.

What we can infer however is that size does matter for power RBs. Jerome Bettis, Jim Brown, Corey Dillon, Jamal Lewis, all of these guys are known for being classic power runners, and they're all over 225 lbs, most power runners seem to be around 250 even. Smaller backs like Westbrook, Marshall Faulk, and Dunn are known for being shifty runners. Its no coincident that there's size often reflects running style, and it would be no great leap of faith to assume a RB under 210 will not have much success with the power-running style.

If you are say 178 obviously you can't be a power back. But over 200 pounds there are variants in styles. Holmes is elusive but can still bowl you over at 210 as can Droughns. Suggs is an elusive runner and always has been. Droughns is a straigh line runner in the mold of a Stephen Davis as I have already illustrated, but you ignored that ever so crucial detail to the argument.


Well, I was going to let the Stephen Davis thing slide, but if you really want to bring that comparison up. Stephen Davis is 230lbs. He can use the power-running style, because he's large enough. If you think 23 lbs of added muscle won't make a different, try find a pair of buddies around 230 and 207 and try tackling each of them running straight at you. Even if Droughns does use the same style as Davis, he's not going to have the same success, because he lacks the necessary weight.

Droughns size definitely wasn't a concern for 1300 yards and 6 TDs in 13 games now was it. And to figure he will split the carries decreases his chance of injury wouldn't you say?


Who brought up injury? Injuries are fluky and unpredicable. That's why I've yet to bring them into the argument. As for the yards, I'll say it again: Droughns played for Denver last year. Denver is where RBs go to be successful. Just about any RB can be plugged into that system, so long as they're capable of making one cutback.
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Daddymike59 » Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:24 am

maddog60 wrote:I dont think there will RBBC. I think Crennel brought in Droughns to make sure he had depth in the backfield and could establish a running game so he can bring in a young QB and have a strong running game for the kid to fall back on while developing. I think Suggs will turn out to be a surprise #3 RB for teams in a lot of leagues. I think he wins the full-time starting job, with Droughns spelling him, and pushing him, while William Green makes it more obvious why just about everything from the prevoious era of the team needs to go.

THIS is a true statement. Romeo is NOT an RBBC coach Droughns was brought in to push Green off his Lazy ass into a 2nd rb spot. The true controversy is who is going to be #2 Green or Droughns.
Image


Props to Leber for the nice artwork!
Daddymike59
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 2915
Joined: 6 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: GOM=30 Home of the Buckeyes

Postby ROYALWITCHEESE » Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:26 pm

How can Suggs be better if they both average 3.4, numbers man? It is what it is. I don't care if girl scouts are blocking. Oh by the way Denver also has the smallest line in the league. And no probowlers. I wasn't going to say this but you're arguing FOR AND against players you have limited knowledge of. You already got schooled by many in the Harrington thread. Do you long for beatings? That has to be it.

You don't even know what a 3rd down back is sonny boy. A 3rd down back is someone who comes in on 3rd and longs that has the ability to catch the ball as well as run it. I said Droughns came in to be the short yardage back. Once again, you criticize me but you don't even know the game or it's terminology. So this time I mean it. LEARN FOOTBALL. But since you want to bring up '3rd down backs,' Reuben also caught more balls than Suggs.

Look man. Droughns runs with power and strength. If you haven't seen it then I don't know what to tell you. He was a lead blocking FB. You have to have strength to pave the way. I never said he was the same size as Davis. I said he runs in a similar mold.

You brought up injury. You said he wouldn't hold up at 207. What else could you mean? That he'll get tired? Give me a break and stop spinning.

Debating you is like debating with a 5 year old. They ignore certain points in the argument, until you bring them up again, then they offer an excuse.

This is it: Go do some real research so that you know what you are talking about. Things for you to look up: learn, defensivemen, 3rd down back, relevant, equal, weight vs strength, actual Droughns footage.

When you've completed your assignment son, we will discuss the matter.
ROYALWITCHEESE
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 849
Joined: 7 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby skinsfan » Mon Jul 11, 2005 1:44 pm

Browns learned to not do a RBBC not so long ago when they tried White/Green/another guy. I see Suggs as the clear-cut starter because Cleveland would be stupid in wasting their top draft pick who undoubtedly is loaded with talent. Droughns runs like Carlos Baerga, only worse (anyone see Baerga score the winning run in the first game of the Nats-Phillies series? Funny indeed).
Skins fan through thick and thin.
skinsfan
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2228
Joined: 6 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: DC

Postby maddog60 » Mon Jul 11, 2005 2:20 pm

ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:How can Suggs be better if they both average 3.4, numbers man? It is what it is. I don't care if girl scouts are blocking.


But I lack football knowledge? Blocking matters, and Droughns had superior blocking, do I need to list how many RBs have succeeded at Denver for you again?

Oh by the way Denver also has the smallest line in the league. And no probowlers.


That's right. Attention everyone! Thanks to ROYAL's expert knowledge we can now conclude that Denver's offensive line is not a good offensive line. They're too small! Read up on something before you post. Denver specifically uses smaller lineman. They're quicker and they use cut-blocking extensively. Guys liek Orlando Pace are used for pass blocking, but don't really open gaping holes for RBs. Denver is all about the running system, not so much the individual players. They use quick linemen, cut-blocking on the backside, and designed cutbacks for great effect and have been for about decade. You might know that if you've watched as much Denver football as you claim.

I tell you what, you don't want to take my word for it that Denver's offensive line is superior to cleveland's in run blocking, put it to a vote. Make a post with a poll for the cafe, over which is better 3.4 ypc behind Denver's offensive line or behind Cleveland's. I leave it up to you, because I'm not going to insult the intelligence of the other members of this forum who can easily discern which is better.

I wasn't going to say this but you're arguing FOR AND against players you have limited knowledge of. You already got schooled by many in the Harrington thread. Do you long for beatings? That has to be it.

You don't even know what a 3rd down back is sonny boy.


The personal attacks stop right now. I will not tolerate it. Name calling on the internet is pathetic, so just grow up.

A 3rd down back is someone who comes in on 3rd and longs that has the ability to catch the ball as well as run it.


Now you're contradicting yourself:

Of course you are going to get less yards on 3rd and short. That's when the most defenders are in the box.


That was your original response to Droughns decline in ypc on 3rd downs. Clearly, you thought less than a day ago, that those numbers reflected his running ability in 3rd and short. Now that its clear that Suggs is just as good if not better in those situations you're trying to change what the numbers mean.

Look man. Droughns runs with power and strength. If you haven't seen it then I don't know what to tell you. He was a lead blocking FB. You have to have strength to pave the way. I never said he was the same size as Davis. I said he runs in a similar mold.


And I'll say it for the last time, read the goddamn post before you respond. Droughns can run in that style if he wants, but his small size is going to make him ineffective at that running style. Stop arguing completely different points and then telling me I don't know what I'm talking about. RBs that use the style you say Droughns does are all significantly bigger than Droughns, so either logic dictates he's too small to be effective with that style. Until you actually respond to this point which I've made numerous times already, I'm done explaining it to you for the Xth time.

You brought up injury. You said he wouldn't hold up at 207. What else could you mean? That he'll get tired? Give me a break and stop spinning.


No, I never brought up injury. I said he didn't have the size for this. He simply won't be effective trying to run through people. Especially without Denver's elite run blocking, he'll be more easily taken down by middle linbackers, he won't have the ability to drag players or fall forward nearly as well as other power runners. That's what else I could mean.

Debating you is like debating with a 5 year old. They ignore certain points in the argument, until you bring them up again, then they offer an excuse.

This is it: Go do some real research so that you know what you are talking about. Things for you to look up: learn, defensivemen, 3rd down back, relevant, equal, weight vs strength, actual Droughns footage.

When you've completed your assignment son, we will discuss the matter.


Debating with you is like talking to a parrot, you just repeat the same thing over and over no matter what is said.

Like I said before, don't make this personal. I've been very tolerant of your rude behavior, the insults you use in place of facts, but if you to continue getting personal and slinging insults, be my guest, you only make an arse out of yourself in doing so.
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby FantasyMoneyMan » Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:35 pm

Right now Suggs is number 1. This will not change unless he gets hurt. Surprisingly, Green is #2 and Rub #3. The staff know that suggs is the best RB, but are surprised by the ethic of Green. Look for the this depth chart to remain the same after camp.
Fantasy Money Man
FantasyChallenge.com
FantasyMoneyMan
Water Boy
Water Boy

User avatar

Posts: 52
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: War Room

Postby ROYALWITCHEESE » Mon Jul 11, 2005 9:51 pm

How is sonny boy an insult? What are you 15? The fact that you know not what a 'third down back' is shows me this might be the case. You got schooled on the Harrington thread. That's not an insult--it's the truth and sometimes the truth hurts.

Where did I say Cleveland's line was better? I was merely using your argument of 'Droughns is too small to run with power', against you. If size matters, how is it that Denver's smallish line is able to produce holes for RBs. They eliminated cut blocking last season--meaning they have to use conventional techniques--which goes to show how much you know about the equation.

You say I'm contradicting myself? Look at the words--again this goes back to the dictionary. 3rd and LONG (where a 3rd down back would be used) is COMPLETELY different than third and SHORT (where a power runner would be used). Say it with me now 'long and short are different.' Good. Think about it. If the defense knows you are going to run, you are going to get less yards--as would be the case on third and short. That is not a contradiction. EVERY running back has a drop off in ypc on 3rd down. If you don't think so look it up. So that argument is invalid which is why I dismissed it.

Wow. The pot calling the kettle black. Never did I curse you and use blasphemy. People who talk like you obviously lack the intelligence to express themselves with words.

Well, Droughns 'ineffective' running style got him 1300 yards. How's that for ineffective? You keep ignoring my Holmes example. Holmes runs with power, yet is 5'9 213. Here's another Chester Taylor runs with power 5'11 213. Clinton Portis runs with power 5'11 205. Cadillac Williams runs with power 5'11 210. You don't have to be 225 to run with power. All these guys prove it every week.

You know, you're argument really doesn't make sense when you think of it in terms of I'm not arguing that Droughns is going to be the full time starter. I'm saying that he's going to play in short yardage and goal line situations. Why is that so hard to believe? No RB in the league gets the ball EVERYTIME. If Suggs is named starter, he will have to rest. And when will that be? Third downs and goal line. So whether he was brought in for that purpose (my argument) or not (your argument) he's still going to be in on third downs and goal line. And we will not know the answer as to why that is. It will still be speculation.
ROYALWITCHEESE
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 849
Joined: 7 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby ROYALWITCHEESE » Mon Jul 11, 2005 9:54 pm

Daddymike59 wrote:
maddog60 wrote:I dont think there will RBBC. I think Crennel brought in Droughns to make sure he had depth in the backfield and could establish a running game so he can bring in a young QB and have a strong running game for the kid to fall back on while developing. I think Suggs will turn out to be a surprise #3 RB for teams in a lot of leagues. I think he wins the full-time starting job, with Droughns spelling him, and pushing him, while William Green makes it more obvious why just about everything from the prevoious era of the team needs to go.

THIS is a true statement. Romeo is NOT an RBBC coach Droughns was brought in to push Green off his Lazy ass into a 2nd rb spot. The true controversy is who is going to be #2 Green or Droughns.


You have a link proving that Romeo is not an RBBC coach?
ROYALWITCHEESE
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 849
Joined: 7 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Flockers » Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:38 pm

ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:
Daddymike59 wrote:
maddog60 wrote:I dont think there will RBBC. I think Crennel brought in Droughns to make sure he had depth in the backfield and could establish a running game so he can bring in a young QB and have a strong running game for the kid to fall back on while developing. I think Suggs will turn out to be a surprise #3 RB for teams in a lot of leagues. I think he wins the full-time starting job, with Droughns spelling him, and pushing him, while William Green makes it more obvious why just about everything from the prevoious era of the team needs to go.

THIS is a true statement. Romeo is NOT an RBBC coach Droughns was brought in to push Green off his Lazy ass into a 2nd rb spot. The true controversy is who is going to be #2 Green or Droughns.


You have a link proving that Romeo is not an RBBC coach?


Do you have one proving he is?
Flockers
General Manager
General Manager

Graphics Expert
Posts: 4257
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Postby maddog60 » Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:26 pm

ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:How is sonny boy an insult? What are you 15? The fact that you know not what a 'third down back' is shows me this might be the case. You got schooled on the Harrington thread. That's not an insult--it's the truth and sometimes the truth hurts.


You've been nothing but derrogatory towards me since you first posted something in response to me (see Harrington thread). I've been more than tolerant of your inflammatory remarks, because I'd actually like to have a serious discussion about football. So far, your comments have been personal attacks on me and my intelligence instead of counter points to my arguments, which is a tell-tale sign fo a weak argument on your part, but I've been more than wiling to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Where did I say Cleveland's line was better?


Then you would agree Denver is a superior run blocking offensive line compared to Cleveland? You yourself said, you dont care if girl scouts are blocking. Well, I hate to break it to you, but that does matter. The fact that with an inferior line Lee Suggs performed at the same ypc in 3rd downs as Droughns, clearly indicates that he is a better runner on 3rd down. If you dispute that, please, offer some sort of proof.

I was merely using your argument of 'Droughns is too small to run with power', against you. If size matters, how is it that Denver's smallish line is able to produce holes for RBs. They eliminated cut blocking last season--meaning they have to use conventional techniques--which goes to show how much you know about the equation.


Funny, in your previous post, you claimed my comments about Suggs could only mean that I was concerned he would be injured. Now that I've explained my comments, you claim to have understood them all along. You just got caught in a lie.

Secondly, are you honestly telling me you size matters just as much for a RB as it does an offensive lineman? Droughns is 207, and he's going to face 250-60 lb middle linebackers if he runs up the middle, power style. Denver's offensive linemen weigh in at 338, 295, 286, 283, and 290. Lets get a few sample defensive lines:

Atlanta (they performed well last year)
273, 274, 285, 293 avg weight: 281.25
Jacksonville (their starting DTs are known for stuffing the run)
278, 270, 312, 328 avg weight: 297
Carolina (possibly the best defensive line in the NFL)
283, 275, 310, 335 avg weight: 300.75

Denver's offensive line averages a weight of: 298.4

They don't suffer the size disadvantage Suggs does.

Oh, the league banned cut-blocking? Tell that to Cincinnati. The league only disallowed cut blocking from behind last year. So long as a lineman got his head in front of the defensiveman's legs, it was legal. The league allowed Denver to cut block last year, they just accumulate fines which the team pays because the strategy works so well for them.


You say I'm contradicting myself? Look at the words--again this goes back to the dictionary. 3rd and LONG (where a 3rd down back would be used) is COMPLETELY different than third and SHORT (where a power runner would be used). Say it with me now 'long and short are different.' Good. Think about it. If the defense knows you are going to run, you are going to get less yards--as would be the case on third and short. That is not a contradiction. EVERY running back has a drop off in ypc on 3rd down. If you don't think so look it up. So that argument is invalid which is why I dismissed it.


Ok, I'll go slowly because you appear confused about this. Were we not comparing Lee Suggs' performance on 3rd down to Droughns' performance on 3rd down?
(The answer is yes, as our posts indicate)

Would it not then be improper to apply that statistic to how a RB performs on 2nd and short, or 4th and short, 1st and goal, etc?
(the answer again, is yes)

Therefore, where comparing how each did, we're comparing how they perform as a RB in 3rd down situations (both long and short). Therefore, we are talking about how they perform as a 3rd down RB, which by definition, is a RB used on 3rd down.

I did look up other RBs ypc on 3rd down, and you're incorrect in your assumption that every RB's ypc suffers on 3rd down. In fact after a quick 10 minute or so search, I was able to find at least 6 starting RBs from last year who performed markedly better on 3rd down (we're talking close to or over 1 ypc better) than they did on 1st and 2nd downs. I'll leave it to you to find out which ones I'm talking about, since you're so sure every RB does worse you felt the need to type it in all caps. Also, there was a number of RBs that performed similarly well (slightly worse or better) on 3rd down as they did on first down (for example, Priest Holmes and LT). Droughns dropped 1.5 ypc on 3rd down compared to all other downs. That's a significant, and valid argument. If you don't believe me, why not do the research, like you suggested?

Wow. The pot calling the kettle black. Never did I curse you and use blasphemy. People who talk like you obviously lack the intelligence to express themselves with words.


Incorrect. The very first thing you ever said in reference to me was "I said yards numbnuts!" That was the entirely of your inflammatory post. Not once have I labeled you with a swear, nor have I insulted your intelligence, despite your fondness for doing so of me. Perhaps you're trying to get the thread closed, or goad me into a flame war, I could care less. I want to debate the facts, so if you'd like to do the same, respond to my posts, and don't post insulting remarks you have no basis for making.

Well, Droughns 'ineffective' running style got him 1300 yards. How's that for ineffective?


I'll say it for the last time: He ran behind Denver's offensive line. In the past 10 years, 9 RBs have ran for over 1000 yards in a season for Denver, and its been done with 5 different RBs in that time span. Denver has had a perennial strong running game despite rotating in and out RBs on an average of 2 years.

You keep ignoring my Holmes example. Holmes runs with power, yet is 5'9 213. Here's another Chester Taylor runs with power 5'11 213. Clinton Portis runs with power 5'11 205. Cadillac Williams runs with power 5'11 210. You don't have to be 225 to run with power. All these guys prove it every week.


Holmes does run with power, but that's because in my opinion, he's a complete RB. He has receiving skills, falls forward, and the speed to make cuts to avoid players. Clinton Portis is not a power runner. He had success, doing what denver does best, cutbacks. Cutbacks specifically are designed for smaller, speedy backs who can turn, and cut away from a defender, not run through them. Chester Taylor, I'll take your word for, having seen maybe one of the games he started. Though the sample size to evaluate his running style upon is rather small. Caddillac Williams has however not proven a thing. He's a rookie who has yet to play a single NFL game. He's in no way proven he can be an effective power runner in the NFL, and the automatic assumption that he will is poor analysis.

You know, you're argument really doesn't make sense when you think of it in terms of I'm not arguing that Droughns is going to be the full time starter. I'm saying that he's going to play in short yardage and goal line situations. Why is that so hard to believe? No RB in the league gets the ball EVERYTIME. If Suggs is named starter, he will have to rest. And when will that be? Third downs and goal line. So whether he was brought in for that purpose (my argument) or not (your argument) he's still going to be in on third downs and goal line. And we will not know the answer as to why that is. It will still be speculation.


Perhaps you're not understanding my overall point. My original post was Droughns was added for depth, to be a complete RB option, not for spot duty on 3rd and short. He will either back up Suggs, or spell him when he's tired (much the way Alexander or Dillon or LT gets spelled), or he will win the starting job outright. With only Suggs and Green on the roster, and given Green's work ethic and past, it seems logical that the Browns would get a guy to be a replacement should Suggs get injured, not the Duckett to his Dunn. If they wanted a 3rd and short RB, there were better options available, as I posted before.
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

PreviousNext

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 2:25 hours
(and 43 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact