Are 52% of ppl here ******ed?

[BigDogsHunt]

Are you kidding??? Which of those teams... or the other playoff teams... has TWO probowl quality backs?

Are you trying to suggest that if we trade Ricky we aren't allowed to have ANYBODY play second tailback?

I wouldn't think that the biggest Ricky Williams fan in the world could say with a straight face that a second tailback is more important than a first quarterback.

That's just ridiculous.

Show me a first QB and I will consider the trade of Ricky.

Also, define PB quality backs....cause by the book the Dolphins dont have 2 ProBowl RB's either.....!

As a matter of fact based on teams sharing carriers its hard to say if anyone would have multiple probowl RB's on the same team. But you cant deny that sharing the load works fine in many places.

And I think Carolina's, Pitts, and Denver's backs any of them...if solo could all be PROBOWL quality.

 

[nopony]

Which of our two running backs made it to the pro bowl?

Note the word "quality". Which is their own argument, don't blame me.

And no one is saying it is more important, just that it isn't worth giving up for a QB that has yet to prove himself.

?

That's exactly what they're saying. At least the people I am discussing with. I wasn't talking about Carr. I was talking about overvaluing a second runningback.

This is what I was responding to:

You need 2 runningbacks to be successful in this league, and guess what people......we got.....2.

Assuming that I'm allowed to carry two runningbacks even if I traded Ricky... then any sort of analysis of playoff rosters for the last five years prove that untrue.

 

[dgarrisonb]

I would have to agree with keeping Ricky. While I don't like what he has done in the past you can't fault the 2 back system. Let's take a look for a moment at Denver. They have Ron Dayne/Tatum Bell and I forget the third. If you look at what they have done the are almost consisently in the playoffs and they however DO have a QB too. Feedback?

 

[BigDogsHunt]

Note the word "quality". Which is their own argument, don't blame me.

That's exactly what they're saying. At least the people I am discussing with. I wasn't talking about Carr. I was talking about overvaluing a second runningback.

This is what I was responding to:

Assuming that I'm allowed to carry two runningbacks even if I traded Ricky... then any sort of analysis of playoff rosters for the last five years prove that untrue.

Again, I think Denver, Pitt, and Carolina (all playoff teams) have quality depth at RB. Ricky and Ronnie are better depth for Miami than an unknown QB.

Carr is who I was responding to specifically, but again, name a QB and I will provide my opinion of whether giving up Ricky for him is worth it.

 

[BigDogsHunt]

I would have to agree with keeping Ricky. While I don't like what he has done in the past you can't fault the 2 back system. Let's take a look for a moment at Denver. They have Ron Dayne/Tatum Bell and I forget the third. If you look at what they have done the are almost consisently in the playoffs and they however DO have a QB too. Feedback?

Bell, Dayne, and Anderson for Denver

Bettis, Staley, Parker for Pitt

Davis, Foster, Goings for Carolina

Brown, Williams, Minor/Morris? for Miami

 

[Ark139954]

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Personally I wouldn't trade Ricky for any avaliable QB right now in FA or the draft.
We all know what Ricky is capable of. In my opinion there is no other RB in football that can take over a game on his own and change the outcome of a game like Ricky.
Look what he did in 2002...over 1800 yards rushing and he did that with defenses knowing we couldn't pass with Lucas at QB. No doubt he would of had over 2000 yards.
And I'm not sure if Ronnie Brown will have the same effect on defenses as Ricky has.

u guys r rediculous!!!!!!!!!!!have u ever watched football before? Ricky is 28 and is not getting any younger. Even if ronnie is not that good you cannot spend a #2 on him and keep a back up just in case. We have spent to much on ronnie to have ricky. If ronnie gets hurt then too bad for us. no one should run a team worrying if someone gets hurt. The team will suck. u need back ups but not ones that are good enough to get u a good player in a trade. U people need to realize that this is not madden and we cannot have a 53 man roster of all good back ups. We need 22 players who are good at all the different positions, not 22 with 2 good at one position and none at another.

 

[Ark139954]

Bell, Dayne, and Anderson for Denver

Bettis, Staley, Parker for Pitt

Davis, Foster, Goings for Carolina

Brown, Williams, Minor/Morris? for Miami

there is one main starter in all for all those teams except denver. They dont even count because all their backs are good because of their o-line.

 

[PressCoverage]

that VIP thing looks better and better every day...

 

[Gonzo]

Note the word "quality". Which is their own argument, don't blame me.

?

That's exactly what they're saying. At least the people I am discussing with. I wasn't talking about Carr. I was talking about overvaluing a second runningback.

This is what I was responding to:

Assuming that I'm allowed to carry two runningbacks even if I traded Ricky... then any sort of analysis of playoff rosters for the last five years prove that untrue.

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought that when you said pro bowl, you meant "pro bowl". You can understand my confusion. And the whole conversation is about Carr as the reason for giving up the two runningback setup, so who are you talking about trading for? Because being against trading for Carr would certainly not be overvaluing a second running back.

And please, do that analysis. The majority had a strong second running back, and sometimes a third (as in the previously mentioned case of Carolina, who also have an above average QB in Delhomme, at best).

 

[Gonzo]

that VIP thing looks better and better every day...

You really wouldn't regret it.

 

[Gonzo]

there is one main starter in all for all those teams except denver. They dont even count because all their backs are good because of their o-line.

Only on paper. The same could be said for us. Davis and Foster were both starter quality, and a case could be made for Goings as well. And when all are healthy, who is the main starter for Pittsburgh? A case could be made for Bettis and Parker.

 

[nopony]

I've been trying to figure out what the original poster bleeped out in the headline. I have no idea what that was supposed to say.

 

[Ark139954]

Only on paper. The same could be said for us. Davis and Foster were both starter quality, and a case could be made for Goings as well. And when all are healthy, who is the main starter for Pittsburgh? A case could be made for Bettis and Parker.

u and me both know that foster is the starter aswell as parker. bettis is a change of pace back.

 

[BROGS]

for what ricky s is getting paid we would have to be knocked over with a deal...carr is not gonna do folks

 

[BigDogsHunt]

u and me both know that foster is the starter aswell as parker. bettis is a change of pace back.

Actually Davis and Staley are the respective starters but injuries knocked both out which is why Foster and Parker bumped up. And Bettis most likely is the number 2 but will concede on the change of pace argument....at the end of the game, Bettis is the number 1 if they have the lead and want ball control.