|
Post by Morkim on Sept 4, 2014 15:16:06 GMT -5
Vastly underrated IMO. Did you see his ranking on the player list thing? AP might be a pure runner, but this guy is top 3 as an overall back. He is so stinking complete its unreal. you think as a complete player, Forte is above one of AP/McCoy/Charles ? Yes. IMO, based on some ageism and complete all around player (blocking/catching/running) I'd go: McCoy Charles Forte
|
|
|
Post by MarchingOn on Sept 4, 2014 15:17:20 GMT -5
Most complete backs: 1. Forte 2. Pierre Thomas 3. Ahmad Bradshaw
Le'veon Bell to be on this list in a couple seasons.
|
|
|
Post by Morkim on Sept 4, 2014 15:20:02 GMT -5
Most complete backs: 1. Forte 2. Pierre Thomas 3. Ahmad Bradshaw Le'veon Bell to be on this list in a couple seasons. Now you're just getting crazy. Either you think Bradshaw was a god out of the backfield, or you think McCoy and Charles don't sacrifice their bodies like they do to get that block. They might miss a block or two, purely based on size. But they almost always make the good read. Its on tape brah. And PT and Bradshaw ain't close in the other categories
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2014 15:24:35 GMT -5
I have already stated my opinion on Matt Forte. This thread was hijacked long time ago. Its pretty well been dead for 3 days. Thanks for trying to be a smartass though. Who hijacked it? It wasnt hijacked really. It was a dead thread. Eddie was the first to post off topic....On a dead thread.
|
|
|
Post by MarchingOn on Sept 4, 2014 15:26:19 GMT -5
Most complete backs: 1. Forte 2. Pierre Thomas 3. Ahmad Bradshaw Le'veon Bell to be on this list in a couple seasons. Now you're just getting crazy. Either you think Bradshaw was a god out of the backfield, or you think McCoy and Charles don't sacrifice their bodies like they do to get that block. They might miss a block or two, purely based on size. But they almost always make the good read. Its on tape brah. And PT and Bradshaw ain't close in the other categories Well, I would say making the good read doesn't necessarily mean they are a good blocker. I can't speak about Charles' blocking ability, but Mccoy is a dreadful blocker according to PFF. Pierre is on this list. He has no business being in the best RB conversation, but as a complete back, I have an immensely hard time seeing anybody better all around than Thomas, other than Forte.
|
|
|
Post by plax on Sept 4, 2014 15:29:50 GMT -5
Now you're just getting crazy. Either you think Bradshaw was a god out of the backfield, or you think McCoy and Charles don't sacrifice their bodies like they do to get that block. They might miss a block or two, purely based on size. But they almost always make the good read. Its on tape brah. And PT and Bradshaw ain't close in the other categories Well, I would say making the good read doesn't necessarily mean they are a good blocker. I can't speak about Charles' blocking ability, but Mccoy is a dreadful blocker according to PFF. Pierre is on this list. He has no business being in the best RB conversation, but as a complete back, I have an immensely hard time seeing anybody better all around than Thomas, other than Forte. i see what you are trying to say, but by that logic, Luck, Kaep, Wilson, and Rodgers are the best QBs in the league.
|
|
|
Post by plax on Sept 4, 2014 15:32:14 GMT -5
there is actual discussion with complete backs now, so no more bickering.
|
|
|
Post by Morkim on Sept 4, 2014 15:40:19 GMT -5
Now you're just getting crazy. Either you think Bradshaw was a god out of the backfield, or you think McCoy and Charles don't sacrifice their bodies like they do to get that block. They might miss a block or two, purely based on size. But they almost always make the good read. Its on tape brah. And PT and Bradshaw ain't close in the other categories Well, I would say making the good read doesn't necessarily mean they are a good blocker. I can't speak about Charles' blocking ability, but Mccoy is a dreadful blocker according to PFF. Pierre is on this list. He has no business being in the best RB conversation, but as a complete back, I have an immensely hard time seeing anybody better all around than Thomas, other than Forte. Scale of 1/10 how good of a rusher and pass catcher and rusher are PT/Bradshaw? (Seperate ratings) now do Jamaal and McCoy. Add in 1/10 pass pro. (Although I thought McCoy was better than that, and I don't think he's bad, or else he wouldnt be asked to do it so much. Wonder how much of that is a by product of Vick) I'm still looking, but I know I've read a couple articles that PFF had Jamaal in the top 10 as a pass pro.
|
|
|
Post by MarchingOn on Sept 4, 2014 15:51:49 GMT -5
Well, I would say making the good read doesn't necessarily mean they are a good blocker. I can't speak about Charles' blocking ability, but Mccoy is a dreadful blocker according to PFF. Pierre is on this list. He has no business being in the best RB conversation, but as a complete back, I have an immensely hard time seeing anybody better all around than Thomas, other than Forte. i see what you are trying to say, but by that logic, Luck, Kaep, Wilson, and Rodgers are the best QBs in the league. Are you saying my line of thinking is that those QBs are the best because they are the most complete? And since Brady, Brees Manning, etc. don't have mobility, they aren't complete and therefore can't be the best? If my post came across that way, then it wasn't suppose to, because I agree, that's faulty logic. But I am not putting Pierre on the "most complete" list only because he does everything well, but nothing exceptional. Pierre does everything a lot better than just "well", I think. == Pierre had a bit of a down year running the ball last year, but normally, he's a very good runner. In 2012, Pierre had 473 yards on 105 carries. If you extrapolate his carries out to 280 (which is a little less than how much the top RBs get), his yard total comes out to 1260 for that year. Doing the same process in years past, you get: 2011: 1427 yards 2010: (Pierre was injured this season) 2009: 1511 yards 2008: 1349 yards 2007: 1346 yards In short, if Pierre received the same amount of carries as some feature backs, there's good reason to believe he would consistently be near the 1400 yard mark.As for receiving, that should be the one area of Pierre's game I don't have to convince anybody on. He's a top flight pass-catching RB in this league, the stats speak for themselves. Blocking is probably the weakest part of these three categories, but by no means is he bad at it. He probably isn't one of the best blockers, but he's a damn reliable one.
|
|
|
Post by Morkim on Sept 4, 2014 15:55:19 GMT -5
Extrapolating anything kills your argument MarchingOnDidn't you agree with me it was dumb when I said a RB in college football was on pace for 52 TDs?
|
|