Help Me Settle This Argument

Dolfan1000

Hall Of Famer
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Messages
6,263
Reaction score
3
So my friend and I are arguing about the RBs in the draft- he prefers Cedric, and I prefer Ronnie. He claims that the only reason that I am pro-Ronnie is because the media is rating him #1, and I am being a follower. :shakeno: Ridiculous, I know. ANYWAY, he then tells me that this is why the draft is so great, nobody knows and there are always going to be busts and shocker picks, and in his opinion, Cedric has the most potential to be a star. Then he comes out with this line that really had me thinking, "People also thought Ricky would be better then McNabb!" (Keep in mind- he is an Eagles fan) I mean, not even considering the fact that Ricky is a schmo, I got to thinking whether you can compare a QB and a RB in terms of "who is better". Like, who is to say that if Ricky was not into the ganja that he wouldnt be having a greater impact on our team then McNabb?

I just want your opinion- can you really make such a comparison?
 

MikeO

Premium Member
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Jul 17, 2004
Messages
15,327
Reaction score
123
Impact players make an impact.

Comparing Ricky and McNabb is fair. Let's say Ricky is off the weed and played last year and has a normal Ricky-year. McNabb is a bigger impact player because 4 conference championships and a super bowl apperance.

Ronnie and Cedric comparison is tough now since both are RB's. Who will have the bigger impact, only time will tell.
 

nolefin

thank you
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
2,127
Reaction score
6
Age
40
Location
nashville,TN
man i have to agree with your friend the media has hyped up brown but there is a reason he is big fast and strong, but that does not always translate into nfl success, after the college football season was over benson and williams were rated higher than brown. dont forget caddy started over brown, but i will take any of the 3 i think they are all good
 

yankeehillbilly

FinHeaven VIP
Joined
May 7, 2004
Messages
4,636
Reaction score
2
Age
54
Location
Smackdab in the middle of Hoosierland
Instead of RW/McNabb, a better comparison would have been RW/E. James. Ricky was more the power RB much like Benson, while James was more the complete back like Brown. Which would have more impact on your team depends on what kind of offense you have. If you have a QB that can take advantage of a pass catching RB and an OC that likes to mix things up to keep the D guessing then Brown would probably have the most impact. If you have an Offense that runs right, runs left, short out to the WR, then probably Benson would be your best bet.
 

finsnchips

2005 FinHeaven GM League Champion!!
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,049
Reaction score
1
Age
32
Location
England
ronnie is hyped... and a lot of people here have fallen for it. Since he ran his '4.32' he has shot to the top of everyone's board.

IMO, Benson is the better runner. I think Cadillac will prove to be a better pro back than Ronnie because of his vision. Ronnie may be powerful, but his vision is not the best.

I'd go with your friend on Benson, sorry man. BTW, he is right, McNabb has gone to 4 NFC Championship games. Ricky, in two seasons here, rushed for 3200 yards and didn't get us to the playoffs.
 

MikeO

Premium Member
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Jul 17, 2004
Messages
15,327
Reaction score
123
yankeehillbilly said:
Instead of RW/McNabb, a better comparison would have been RW/E. James. Ricky was more the power RB much like Benson, while James was more the complete back like Brown. Which would have more impact on your team depends on what kind of offense you have. If you have a QB that can take advantage of a pass catching RB and an OC that likes to mix things up to keep the D guessing then Brown would probably have the most impact. If you have an Offense that runs right, runs left, short out to the WR, then probably Benson would be your best bet.
Bad comparison because Edge has NEVER been the best player on his team. Manning is. Tough to judge impact.

Ricky was always the best player on the teams he played on in N.O and Miami
 

Jaj

What you say?
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
13,149
Reaction score
0
Age
41
Location
LA
Cadillac will become the next great running back. He's a mix of Curtis Martin and L.T.

Brown will eventually be another Deuce McAllister type back, which isn't bad.

Depending on his team Benson will become a solid, 1300-1400 yard back every year.
 

knight6jb

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
1,231
Reaction score
0
Age
35
Location
Orlando, Fl
Jaj said:
Cadillac will become the next great running back. He's a mix of Curtis Martin and L.T.

Brown will eventually be another Deuce McAllister type back, which isn't bad.

Depending on his team Benson will become a solid, 1300-1400 yard back every year.
I second that!!!:rawk:
 

Dolfan1000

Hall Of Famer
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Messages
6,263
Reaction score
3
Well the argument was not necessarily who is the better back, rather if you can compare the "goodness" of a QB vs that of a RB? I know Ricky is a bad example- but obviously the QB is at the center of any offense and like Saban said, he touches the ball every play.
 

TeeMoney

Kid A
Finheaven VIP
Joined
May 25, 2003
Messages
2,592
Reaction score
1,007
Location
Planet Telex
Easy, here's how you settle it. Hypothetical: Both players in their prime (Ricky's 1800 year and pick McNabb's year) You GM a team that needs a RB and a QB. You have ONE pick and will fill the other position with an average RB or QB. Which player do you select? I would take Mcnabb.
 

Omaha_Dolfan

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
999
Reaction score
0
Age
52
Location
Omaha
The way you have to look at it is this way. If you had one pick would you rather have Ricky as your RB or McNabb as your QB. Personally I would prefer to have Ricky as a RB than McNabb as my QB. Ricky was a dominating back that could carry a team on his back. McNabb is a good Quarterback on a good team in a weak division in a weaker conference.

Now as far as explosive QB's I would have to say Vick. When he is healthy he carries the Falcons to the playoffs. Would I rather have Vick than Ricky ... thats a tough one where the only issue is the durability issue of Vick.

edit:
LOL, TeeMoney you posted while I was writing mine.
 

Dolfan2788

Melubulongtime
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
1,826
Reaction score
0
Your friend is right, no-one rated Ronnie that high before the combine and now all of a sudden he runs an unnoficial '4.32' and he is the greateset thing since sliced bread. The media also hyped him up as much as they could, yet if he ran a solid 4.45-4.50 WHICH HE DID OFFICIALLY RUN. Then people would still be on Benson's bandwagon.

Benson ran an officialy 4.51, Ronnie ran an official 4.48......

Everyone keeps thinking that he did run 4.32 but in reality he didn't, his vision is the worst of the big 3, so is his acceleration and so is his cutting ability.
 

TeeMoney

Kid A
Finheaven VIP
Joined
May 25, 2003
Messages
2,592
Reaction score
1,007
Location
Planet Telex
Dolfan2788 said:
Your friend is right, no-one rated Ronnie that high before the combine
You are wrong. Most experts and draftniks had some iteration of Williams, Benson, and Brown as the top 3 with only preference given to what abilities they felt were more important. Most felt that Williams was the fastest of the 3 and regardless of anyone's opinion, you can't deny the effect of a good presentation and great word-of-mouth.

Dolfan2788 said:
and now all of a sudden he runs an unnoficial '4.32' and he is the greateset thing since sliced bread. The media also hyped him up as much as they could, yet if he ran a solid 4.45-4.50 WHICH HE DID OFFICIALLY RUN. Then people would still be on Benson's bandwagon.

Benson ran an officialy 4.51, Ronnie ran an official 4.48......
You are greatly biasing your "facts". Both Brown and Williams ran a 4.43 while Benson ran a 4.62 (an average of various reports) at his pro-day

((Pro Day note, Next Level Scouting, Inc) - TEXAS (March 23rd) senior running back CEDRIC BENSON ran between 4.58 and 4.65 in the 40... some had as fast as 4.55, others as slow as 4.68... here's a breakdown of his 40's... he was whistled to stop, as he had a rolling start on his first attempt, slipped on his second attempt, so his times came on his 3rd and 4th attempts...)

The most interesting information regarding the 3 RB's is that Benson's short shuttle is much slower than both the Auburn RB's. That would hurt Benson far worse than a slow 40 time- not to mention the great list of off-field problems and baggage Benson carries with him.

Dolfan2788 said:
Everyone keeps thinking that he did run 4.32 but in reality he didn't, his vision is the worst of the big 3, so is his acceleration and so is his cutting ability.
Again, you use false information to deceive the reader- and inflate your bias.
 

DolfanCole

FinHeaven VIP
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
2,095
Reaction score
0
Age
49
Location
Hampton, VA
MikeO said:
Impact players make an impact.

Comparing Ricky and McNabb is fair. Let's say Ricky is off the weed and played last year and has a normal Ricky-year. McNabb is a bigger impact player because 4 conference championships and a super bowl apperance.

Ronnie and Cedric comparison is tough now since both are RB's. Who will have the bigger impact, only time will tell.
I have to disagree. I don't think you can really compare a RB and a QB. Well, at least fairly. Sure, impact players are impact players. But, a QB touches the ball on every play. The RB does not. So, the QB has the potential to have a greater impact that a RB just due to the number of touches he has.

Impact players are also determined by who you already have. For instance, if a team has Edge and then drafts Ricky (this is only a hypothetical situation here to prove a point). Given this situation, I wouldn't think either would have a great impact. However, if a team has Travis Minor and drafts Ricky, then Ricky would have a much larger impact.

In Philly's case, I believe that McNabb would have a greater impact due to their dire need for a QB at the time. And since they were a West Coast offense team, the running back would not have had as great of an impact IMO.
 
Top Bottom