hardcore wrote:Never proven he can carry a load....Well that's not a fair assesment. He never had a chance with Hearst in there. Last year in last few games, Barlow proved he could carry the rock and produce when given the chance. Barlow is a much much better back than Westbrook, who(surpise surprise) broke down last year just like he will this year. A 205 lb RB in the NFC East. Do u really think he will last? I think it's pretty funny that people would rank Westbrook with Barlow. Hell, I thinks it's funny that the cheatsheets have him rated below Faulk,Henry,and DD. SF's O-line is good and SF will surprise a few people. People were dawging the Detroit Tigers and their FF players and they have been some of the best. This looks eerily similar. SF will finish 2nd in the NFC west cuz St.Loius and Arizona will stink ... Hell that's 4 games alone where Barlow will outproduce half of everyone's conventional top 10 Rb list.
Homer
Nope. Do u want to wager? You will lose ..Barlow will be top 10 easily .However, your boy Westbrook-well he won't even make it through the season. Barlow will dust him in stats.
I'll take you up on that bet. Barlow's stats from last year (around 5 ypc) were inflated because of A.) To Garcia scaring D and B) situational runs when Hearst got the goaline carries. Barlow will not make top 10 RBs this year. However, I don't think Wesbrook is much better, but like how Cornbread said, I would rather have Westbrook early 3rd then Barlow late 2nd...
I think Barlow could be a huge bust this year. He has an absolutely terrible team surrounding him, one that will surely not finish second in the division. The line isn't as good as you make them sound, and they lost some key parts of it. Even if the line is able to gel, Barlow has to worry about defenses focusing on him and stacking 8 in the box. Barlow is far from proven, and I have doubts as to whether he can carry the complete load by himself.
BrutallyHuge wrote:Again, I'll reiterate. You are adamantly saying that a 3rd down back on a predominantly passing team (that just got TO) ...
Vlad the Impaler wrote:Westbrook was basically a third down back last year, so I think his YPC are somewhat inflated.
King Ghidra wrote:Westbrook had 117 carries in 2003.
106 of them came on 1st and 2nd down.
I'm amazed, apparently getting 11 carries on 3rd/4th down makes you a 3rd down RB these days. Who'd have known? Arguing something that not opinion, but facts clearly contradict is just silly.
Uh, sorry to burst your bubble, but generally third downs are PASSING downs. Westbrook catches passes well, thus he makes a good 3rd down back.
Kensat, my point is that the majority of his usage in the running game came from 1st and 2nd down. Even if you include his 30-something receptions, and for sake of argument we'll say they were all on 3rd down.
37 + (117-106) = 48. 48 out of 154 total touches is roughly 1/3 of his total touches. That leaves 2/3 to be divided between 1st and 2nd down. That's approximately another 1/3 for each of those downs, but that's a fairly even distribution across 1st-3rd downs. It's also logical to assume that not all of his receptions were third down plays, meaning he's getting less than equal usage during 3rd down than on any other down. How can someone who gets used more overall both passing and rushing in both the first and the second down be classified as just a 3rd down RB?
Westbrook is the Eagles running game, and with no one else too good to sit this year, he'll show it.
Westbrook is talented but if he gets 1200yds I'll take the 2.5 hr trip north and literally kiss McNabbs a$$. No way he'll go for 4.5 per max which means he'll need 268 carries to get there or about 17 a game. No way his body will take 268. Like someone said earlier Garner like #'s ......
Westbrook is talented but if he gets 1200yds I'll take the 2.5 hr trip north and literally kiss McNabbs a$$. No way he'll go for 4.5 per max which means he'll need 268 carries to get there or about 17 a game. No way his body will take 268. Like someone said earlier Garner like #'s ......
I'll remind you of this at the end of the season...
Westbrook is talented but if he gets 1200yds I'll take the 2.5 hr trip north and literally kiss McNabbs a$$. No way he'll go for 4.5 per max which means he'll need 268 carries to get there or about 17 a game. No way his body will take 268. Like someone said earlier Garner like #'s ......
I'll remind you of this at the end of the season...
If Westbrook gets 1200 yards, I'll kiss Westbrook's ass and go to the playoff game with no shirt and paint my chest to say "Westbrook = 1200+".
Westbrook is talented but if he gets 1200yds I'll take the 2.5 hr trip north and literally kiss McNabbs a$$. No way he'll go for 4.5 per max which means he'll need 268 carries to get there or about 17 a game. No way his body will take 268. Like someone said earlier Garner like #'s ......
I'll remind you of this at the end of the season...
If Westbrook gets 1200 yards, I'll kiss Westbrook's ass and go to the playoff game with no shirt and paint my chest to say "Westbrook = 1200+".
I'll remind you too then.
As I have pointed out earlier I am not that high on Westbrook, but I think its more likely he will get 1200 then not.
Westbrook is talented but if he gets 1200yds I'll take the 2.5 hr trip north and literally kiss McNabbs a$$. No way he'll go for 4.5 per max which means he'll need 268 carries to get there or about 17 a game. No way his body will take 268. Like someone said earlier Garner like #'s ......
No, you see I use statistics and facts to base my arguments off of. You make assertions, but give no statistics or facts about Westbrook that even indicate he wont be able to handle 268 carries, or keep his average up.
Oh, I do think its possible he'd end up like Garner this year, but with TO in the passing game, Westbrook no longer becomes the Eagles #1 receiving target. Especially with Buckhalter down, he's the sole real running threat, and with a bonafide WR it would seem logical he doesn't get as many looks when they're passing, which would turn into less of a bump up in passing. 800 and 800 is very possible, but I think 1000/600 or 1200/400 is much more likely.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Favre.com » Fri Aug 27, 2004 1:12 pm 
