2010 FA Running Backs

by TrevorR on Dec 2, 2009 11:17 AM CST Comment 53 comments

I know we are in the midst of a nice season and in the wild card running but I have been seeing a lot of stories about Reggie Bush becoming a FA next year. I guess he'll cost about $8 million against the cap next year and really isn't worth that kind of money for what he does with that super talented team.

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/130230-saints-to-dump-bush-in-2010?eref=sihp

It got me thinking, I wonder how he'd do in Green and Gold. Now obviously this would only happen if TT decided to open the teams wallet which isn't super likely but imagine having Grant back there to do the dirty work and Bush as another receiving threat out of the backfield. We could light the league up with screens and dump offs which would open up all sorts of new things for this team

Other potential FA running backs in 2010:

Ronnie Brown (Dolphins - Restricted - Can't imagine they just let him go for nothing)
Pierre Thomas (Saints - Restricted - No way he becomes an FA)
Cadillac Williams (Bucs - Injury prone, probably ready to move on)
Lendale White (Titans - Could be interesting if used right)
Leon Washington (Jets - Wants the BIG bucks, coming off season ending injury)
Jerious Norwood (Falcons - Seems to get hurt every year, great receiving back though)
Chester Taylor (Vikings - Can't see him staying with a team where he has such a limited role)
Ricky Williams (Dolphins - Aging very well, but old)
Willie Parker (Steelers - Will likely want a starter job, but probably won't get one)
Willis McGahee (Ravens - Likely to be dropped)
Mike Bell (Saints)
Kevin Faulk (Patriots - Might be competing with this team for Bush)
Chris Brown (Texans)
Larry Johnson (Bengals)

So who interests you the most if our GM actually opens the teams wallet this year? Do you think we need to make a move at all? I'd love to see someone like Taylor, Norwood, Bush, etc who can catch passes out of the backfield to complement Grant. I'd also consider a McGahee or White kinda larger back if they can commit to running inside the tackles and pound out the yards but I think the receiving back is where we'd see the most benefit!

0 recs | Comment 53 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Bush

Would actually be a good fit for us. Imagine having Bush running a screen pass or a route out of the backfield compard to Grant? How much $ could he really ask for? He has sort of been a bust for where he was drafted, and has been injured a lot lately as well.

If I could get anybody from that list it’s Pierre Thomas. He can do it all but I don’t see the Saints letting him go. I don’t see the Saints keeping Thomas, Bush, and Bell and I think we should go after whoever they drop.

Cadillac Williams actually interests me as well. He is injury prone but when he has played he has looked good, and could be a good fit in our scheme.

I previously thought we should draft a T but this class isn’t too deep at T, and with us having around the 20th pick (hopefully) I don’t know if we’ll able to get a top one. If this is the case then I would be interested in us drafting Spiller (Clemson) or Best (California). Both are explosive runners and are good out of the backfield catching passes.

by packallday555 on Dec 2, 2009 11:53 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

your best option here is definitely McGahee

he can handle the 25-30 carry load and is actually capable of running between the tackles. Bush needs to change his position to a slot receiver. He runs so upright I keep waiting for Sheldon Brown to finish what he started and just shatter his ribcage entirely.

"Just win baby. Yeah, I stole that."
--Jon Gruden

by jackmca on Dec 3, 2009 7:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

wait my bad...

McGahee isn’t a FA until 2011… So the Ravens get to sit on him for one more year, unless they trade him.

"Just win baby. Yeah, I stole that."
--Jon Gruden

by jackmca on Dec 3, 2009 7:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You really think the RAvens will pay that salary to use him for 5 plays a game though? You think McGahee will sit there and do nothing for another year without raising hell? Just wondering…

by TrevorR on Dec 3, 2009 10:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

My order of preference

1A) Russel Okung or Trent Williams in the draft.
Before we worry about replacing our RB who is 7th in the NFL in rushing yards, we need to find a young, stud Tackle in the draft.

If we must replace Grant my choices would be-
1A) Trade for Fred Jackson if the Bills make him available
1. Chester Taylor
2. Pierre Thomas (if Saints make him available)
3. Ricky Williams

All are excellent receivers and can actually run the ball unlike Bush.

"I agree but dont agree"

by juggernaut400 on Dec 2, 2009 1:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

forgot about fred jackson. I don’t know if they’ll let him go or not but he’d be another fun one to look at and those Bills owe us one after stealing TWO players off our practice squad!!!

by TrevorR on Dec 2, 2009 4:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Bills

I could see them trying to trade Lynch before Jackson. He doesn’t get paid much, from what I recall his 4 year contract is pretty reasonable, while Lynch might actually save the small market Bills some money. I really don’t know much about what he’s done in Buffalo, so I’m not even sure he be a good fit as a backup.

by Brandon on Dec 2, 2009 11:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Would they franchise tag Chester?

I like Taylor a lot. Except for one year, he has been a rotation back so the wear and tear isn’t a factor with him. But he will be 31 years old next year. Who else is a FA for the Vikings? Would we have to give up too much to get Chester?

by Line Judge on Dec 5, 2009 10:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I doubt they would. AP is becoming better at picking up blitzes and better running routes out of the backfield. He was pretty weak at these two things his first two years, and that’s why Taylor played 30-40% of the time. But obviously you want a player like AP out there every down as he can break one for a TD at any time. Taylor’s playing time has decreased pretty consistently over these past two years and I think the Vikes will let him go out of respect because he certainly could be a starter for another team.

We probably would have to give up a fair amount to get it but I would be in favor of it. Like you pointed out he has still has very fresh legs, and is great out of the backfield.

by packallday555 on Dec 5, 2009 11:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

They won’t need to. He’s already said he’d give them a discount to come back but I don’t think they would anyway…its hard to franchise a 29/30 year old RB who isn’t even your starter. At his age he’s probably just looking for another solid 3-4 year contract to finish things up on a good to great team where he can contribute and not get killed.

by TrevorR on Dec 5, 2009 7:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The problem

With Grant just getting an extension they are not going to pay him decent money to sit.. So we would need someone that can spell Grant. There are a few different ways to look at spelling him. Do we want someone to pound between the tackles to let Grant bounce things outside? If yes than White is the guy. Or do we want someone with more speed and let Grant do the dirty word inside? If yes a Bush, Thomas, or even Mike Bell has shown some flash this year. But the best overall fit I think would be Chester Taylor. He can run inside and has above average speed.

by bizzle4 on Dec 2, 2009 1:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I think I am with you there…Chester is probably a short term solution since he’s 29 but he should still have at least 2 very good years in him due to a light workload for most of his career. He is 29 though or turning 29 soon.

Bell might be an intriguing pick since he camefrom Denver which basically invented our zone blocking scheme. He could fit in really well. I bet NO keeps Bell and Thomas though. Bush seems to make sense to be traded or released. I wouldn’t be shocked to see the Pats go after him though with Faulk being 33 now and a FA. They may not have the cap space though and with their porous D, the offense might not be able to get anymore attention.

There are some pretty good backs that could be available though! That is exciting to see…

I can’t see Grant going away so I think we need someone that can be a pass catcher and guy to stretch the field to the outsides. I just don’t think Grant has the speed or the hands to pull that off.

by TrevorR on Dec 2, 2009 3:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Bush and Pats

I agree I could see Bush going to the Pats. But for different reasons. And remember there is no cap in 2010 as of now. (unless I missed some news?) But with the Pats they have never had a true RB in his prime to say. They use their backs mostly out of the back field. Faulk has been a decent target out there but Bush would be the perfect fit for them to spell Maroney

by bizzle4 on Dec 2, 2009 6:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

How about

we spend money on none of these scrubs, or any free agent running back. If we’re going to be spending money in the offseason, it shouldn’t be on free agent running backs.

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey

by jobe on Dec 2, 2009 4:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

AMEN.

Grant is still going to rush for over 1,000 yards this season, with the worst Oline in the league. Spend the money on the offensive line. I’d like to see our three backs stay. If Ahman can get in shape, and Jackson continues to progress, and Grant stays reliable, we’re fine. I’d would like to see us find a Vet safety with some skills. I’m still not comfortable with our Safety situation. If 20 or 36 go down, we’re in big trouble.

by StephanL on Dec 2, 2009 4:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

1000 yards?

Rushing for 1000 yards is NOTHING in football these days. A very average…even below average…back can rush for 1000 yards easily. You realize that its only 62 yards a game to reach that “magical” number.

We all know that TT isn’t going to go after anyone anyway so its just wishful thinking BUT its clear that Grant is a few things and isn’t a few things. He’s never going to be a good receiver out of the backfield. He’s not going to be a guy to break a lot of long runs. Why not get someone in here (2 back set like most teams have if they don’t have an elite runner) that can make some big plays happen in the open field. I can’t think of another team with as average of a back who gives that back as many carries as Grant gets.

You realize Grant is #5 in the league for total rushes…he’s sitting with the likes of AP, CJ, SJax, MJD, etc. yet he averages the least yards per carry of all of them AND he is a poor receiver. Now that said, Grant has impressed me this year…especially of late. I think he’d be even more effective with someone that could come in on third down and be dangerous. Jackson and Green are just not good…if we stick with them next year, I’ll be VERY disappointed. At the least we need to bring in some fresh meat in the draft to replace one of them.

by TrevorR on Dec 2, 2009 4:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Would you perfer they bring in a back?

Or would you perfer the Packers go after offensive lineman? That’s really what I was getting at.

And Grant is on pace for about 1300 yards this season. I’ll take that.

I definatly agree that it would be worthwile to bring in a spell back. I thought Sutton might have been that guy.

by StephanL on Dec 2, 2009 7:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

The more I think about it, I would much rather build our o-line talent before an Rb. But it would be nice to see us bring in a home run type of guy at Rb to replace Grant on 3rd downs.

by packallday555 on Dec 2, 2009 10:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I absolutely agree

A FA running back is not what we need.

We need depth in the secondary and some offensive linemen. Grant is definitely serviceable for another year or so, and we should definitely look at some options in the upcoming draft, but we should be considering spending our money on re-signing guys like Nick Collins at the moment..

by vitaminx on Dec 3, 2009 6:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think he’d be even more effective with someone that could come in on third down and be dangerous.

He would even be more effective if he had a lineman that could open a hole. or not have to face 2nd and 15 after a 1st down sack.

"I agree but dont agree"

by juggernaut400 on Dec 2, 2009 8:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

one way or the other

he’s obviously not that bad. If your O-Line can step it up a bit and you can grab some speedster in the draft to play on 3rd downs and such, your running game will improve.

"Just win baby. Yeah, I stole that."
--Jon Gruden

by jackmca on Dec 3, 2009 7:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The only way I see them picking off one of those backs...

is if the price is right. Grant is serviceable compared to most of those guys. I see a lot of those FA’s asking for a pretty penny. Brown, Bush, Pierre will probably ask for a lot of money.

The guy I may think about is Lendale White. He splits time with probably the best back so far this season. He may want to move on and could be cheap. The only disadvantage is that he would move to another system where he would share the backfield.

But to be honest, I don’t see back as a major need at this point. Money needs to go to O-line and secondary (need to shore up the reserves here). Anything to make our special teams better as well.

Looking to buy: General Manager Deputy Badge

by Bush League All Star on Dec 2, 2009 7:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yup

by StephanL on Dec 2, 2009 7:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If we are going to replace Grant, it won’t be with an even slower league average guy like White. We need a guy that can hit a big play every once in a while. White’s offseason training enlightenment was to stop drinking Tequilla at the clubs. He didn’t say anything about just not going to those clubs. He is just another player along for the ride to collect a few paychecks before teams notice he doesn’t care.

"I agree but dont agree"

by juggernaut400 on Dec 2, 2009 8:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Heh, I am not talking about replacement.

I am just saying that a lot of those backs there would be out of our price range baring in mind we have a serviceable runner right now. Lendale could be a decent pick up because I feel he wouldn’t cost that much. As for his cost—which would be lower than most on that list—he would probably be the most beneficial. His role would not be as a replacement or someone who will replace Grant down the road. He would be somewhere in the role as a second back.

I don’t really think we should go after him, but to play along the lines of the original post that is who I was offering.

But interesting perspective on Lendale personally. Maybe if he could get his act together, he would be a decent back.

Looking to buy: General Manager Deputy Badge

by Bush League All Star on Dec 3, 2009 6:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think most of you guys are off the mark a bit...

First of all, drafting running backs is easy. Just draft one, and then he’s yours—all for a reasonable price. If you can create a hole for him, he stands a reasonable chance of developing into a valuable player, and if you can’t block for him, then it doesn’t matter who you have anyway. Running Backs are a dime a dozen right now. Heck, your Ryan Grant even proves my point. Julius Jones was leagues better than him at Notre Dame and Grant still turned out to be a half-decent starter in the NFL. You can get a guy who’s even better than that in the 3rd round. Just look for athleticism and you can teach him the rest.

"Just win baby. Yeah, I stole that."
--Jon Gruden

by jackmca on Dec 3, 2009 7:44 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

That may be true but it didn’t work out that way in recent history with the guys we’ve drafted…

by TrevorR on Dec 3, 2009 10:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Bottom Line?

Look at all the teams that run the ball really well. Titans, Panthers, Saints (all of a sudden), Cowboys, Dolphins… and usually you have the Ravens, Giants, and Broncos up there too (although for various reasons those teams aren’t in the top ten this year). How many of the teams I just named have success thanks to a FA acquisition? The only outsider I can think of is Ricky Williams who the Dolphins brought in, and Willis McGahee who the Ravens signed. Aside from that, all of the running backs on all of those teams are drafted by those teams. Chris Johnson, DeAngelo Williams, Ray Rice, Marion Barber, Brandon Jacobs… NONE of these guys were even first round picks!! Hell, Pierre Thomas was UNDRAFTED! These guys are practically FREE! Just grab the next one you think looks decent in the draft.

"Just win baby. Yeah, I stole that."
--Jon Gruden

by jackmca on Dec 3, 2009 7:53 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

While I agree with the general sentiment of your post that it's not hard to get a decent RB

Chris Johnson and DeAngelo Williams were both first round picks.

Selgy

by mittens on Dec 3, 2009 9:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

and...

Deangelo didn’t show up until they spent another high pick on Stewart…then suddenly he was great. Before that he was worthless.

The Saints brought in Mike Bell as a FA, Dolphins brought in Ricky W, Broncos brought in Buckhalter, Ravens brought in McGahee, etc. I can come up with numerous teams that have brought in FA running backs with much success…its a position that you can just sign a guy and have fairly quick success without worrying about a system match. Then you can draft other positions and teach the guy to play in your system.

I do agree with you to a point though. I just think they are missing an explosive change of pace guy and there are quite a few possibilities out there right now that will be FA…all you have to do is pay them some money…nothing else to give up AND you keep your draft picks for other positions where you won’t find such talented FAs.

by TrevorR on Dec 3, 2009 11:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Deangelo was always that good. Fox is just too poor of a coach to realize that. He sticks with his veterans at all costs. He let Deshaun Foster get all the carries when he was at best an average back while a potential Pro Bowler sat on the bench because he wasn’t a vet.

Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb

by verno329 on Dec 4, 2009 2:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

He hasn’t been doing that with Stewart though…he’s almost playing Stewart at the expense of Williams. I suppose you are right about Williams though…Fox is CLEARLY a poor coach though…IMHO

by TrevorR on Dec 4, 2009 2:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Spiller

CJ Spiller is going to be an awesome RB IMO… If there is a choice between him and a good OT, you have to take an OT, but w/ the likely draft position the chances of getting a really good OT seem unlikely.

Spiller would be a STEAL in the 2nd, but late 1st is still really good value! He would be a perfect compliment to Grant. He is explosive fast (similar to Chris Johnson), has experience returning BOTH kickoffs and punts, is a tremendous reciever out of the backfield!

Minus a really good OT in the 1st, I think Spiller would do for us what Harvin has given the queens!! Spiller is my early choice for our 1st rd pick and as a compliment to Grant!

by Strohman on Dec 3, 2009 1:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I’d be on board with this.
Though we need to do what the Vikings did regarding our ST in the offseason, fire the coordinator in charge and bring in someone like their Harwell guy to captain the group and get them in line. We don’t really have anyone that takes charge there do we??

by TrevorR on Dec 3, 2009 3:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I was thinking something along these lines as well. I would obviously like a OT first but like you pointed out we may not be able to get a very good one. Okung and Williams are expected to be top 10 and there have been some questions about the T from Iowa.

by packallday555 on Dec 3, 2009 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm still a Bush fan

although he his NFL career has been disappointing. I think Grant / Bush share could be nice next year.

rmlumley.com

by shaftr on Dec 3, 2009 1:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

None of these FA options are that tempting to me.

I wouldn’t mind looking at Taylor or Norwood, given that they wouldn’t command much money. Taking a gamble on Cadillac Williams or Larry Johnson wouldn’t be a bad idea as long as they’re cheap.

I don’t think we’ll be looking at RBs in the first two rounds this year, given our pressing OL needs. But every year teams find solid backs in the middle rounds of the draft. Kevin Smith, Jamaal Charles, Steve Slaton, and Tashard Choice were all taken in the third round or later and have shown promise.

Selgy

by mittens on Dec 3, 2009 6:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I feel the same way.

I am not really positive about the FAs. Look to the draft for someone. As mentioned before though, our history of drafting backs has been subpar. I think the draft will be the cheap and most beneficial road to take for backs. Our FA money should be allocated to the o-line.

Looking to buy: General Manager Deputy Badge

by Bush League All Star on Dec 3, 2009 6:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah my point with this was kind of thinking that with some proven options out there (some that won’t be all that expensive) we could save our picks for more pressing roles like Oline and Defensive secondary. Honestly, I can’t see us going after some high priced oline guy and we really just need depth at the secondary (and prospects to grow) so if we were going to make a move to go after a position, RB could make sense.

A guy like Mike Bell could be interesting. He’s playing on a $535K contract this year with the Saints. I can’t see Parker and McGahee competing for starting jobs after being outplayed dramatically (second time now for McGahee)…I also think Norwood could come at a good price though I really worry about him staying healthy. Maybe getting off the turf would help him out there.

So again, I doubt we’ll actually go after any of them, but its an interesting conversation to look at considering the options out there this year.

by TrevorR on Dec 3, 2009 6:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Totally

All the FA Rb’s you mentioned above should all be relatively cheap and would all bring an aspect that Grant and all of our other Rb’s do not. It just seems like we have a bunch of guys who are all pretty decent across the board. Bringing in a faster, more explosive back could really help our offense out. And like it’s been mentioned before we have a ton of cap room to work with.

by packallday555 on Dec 3, 2009 10:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That's true

It really isn’t that hard to find a RB in the draft. Many successful backs have been later round picks but the problem is TT doesn’t seem to be a great evaluator of RB talent.

by packallday555 on Dec 3, 2009 10:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah exactly…Oline and RB seem to be positions where the team here in GB are struggling. Maybe its time to get an offensive evaluator in to help with that half of the draft. He does well with WR but aside from Rodgers (which kind of fell into our laps) and WR he seems to struggle evaluating offense altogether.

by TrevorR on Dec 3, 2009 11:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

True

I mean looking at it, I just don’t see how it can be hard to find a good Rb in the draft. A lot of teams have 2 guys that could potentially start, and some teams even have 3. I think if he is interested in getting a Rb, then he should do so in FA. We really need o-line help and I would like to see the majority of the draft dedicated to finding depth at o-line and in the secondary.

by packallday555 on Dec 3, 2009 11:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

everyone is saying how we need dpeth with the OL which I agree so why would we want to waste a draft pick on a RB when we can get proven backs for cheap maybe even in the same price range in FA.

I think the questions that need to be asked is what OL are available in FA. If the quailty of FA OL truimp the FA quaility of RB than our FA money should be spent on OL and then draft a RB. But if the quality of RBs is higher than FA OL than pick up a RB via FA and draft OL. If we picked up a FA RB I would have no problem spending 7 picks of the draft on OL and DBs. This would bring in more quantity to find quality and would be less of a hit or miss chance than it is with just drafting one guy. If we dont pick some one up in FA then that just adds another pos. we need to look at in the draft and adds the risk of picking busts by only being able to draft one or two guys for the OL

by bizzle4 on Dec 4, 2009 1:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

See, the thing is...

Ted really lives (and dies maybe) by the best player available philosphy. He’ll definatly look to grab some OL prospects, but you know that he’ll be drafting all posistions (maybe not QB). You know that he’s going to grab up some linebackers, he can’t help himself. I might be one of the few who don’t want Ted gone. He’s a great evaluator of talent. I’m excited for our young and talented team.

by StephanL on Dec 4, 2009 9:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I totally agree with you on what TT has been. But then again who really knows TT? No one saw TT trading up in the draft to get Matthews. I was more saying what I would like to happen not what would happen.

by bizzle4 on Dec 5, 2009 12:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

It seems like he is starting to understand that he NEEDS to draft players at the positions we need them. He has started to change his ways a bit, and I think it’s because he realizes we should be a top team in the league with the talent we have. The ONLY thing holding us back from being a top team this year is our o-line. I would hope and think TT sees this and is going to do something about it.

I don’t mind the “take the best player thing” but in our case we NEED an OT bad. Clifton is declining and who knows how long Tauscher will stick around. I think they both probably have 1 more year left in them. I wouldn’t mind him taking a couple OLB’s, because we need someone who is a better pass rusher on the left side.

by packallday555 on Dec 5, 2009 11:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I must be to much of a cheesehead

But I like Brandon Jackson. I think he is under utilized. I think his screen game is good. He played great during the SF Game. I would just like to see him play a full game once instead of the situational stuff. Anytime he has been in a game for more than a few snaps good things have happened.

by turd on Dec 4, 2009 8:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I like him too.

But he’s running out of time. He’s gotta step it up.

by StephanL on Dec 4, 2009 9:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

He nevers gets the chance

to step it up though. turd is right, Jackson is under utilized. He isn’t and never will be a great running back but he is great at picking up a blitz and he’s good at runnings screens. Everytime he has been given a chance to carry a load he has produced. He had a 5.5 ypc last season I believe.

by GGGamer on Dec 5, 2009 2:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

He should be MORE than just good though…he was a second round running back who was basically GIVEN a starting job with almost no competition. He’s been a decent back but a huge disappointment overall I think. I’d just be happy if he could just stay healthy at this point!

by TrevorR on Dec 5, 2009 7:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

sadly...

We didn’t miss out on too much…he was probably the best guy at that point for a RB. There wasn’t another notable running back after him until the 7th round (Ahmad Bradshaw and PT undrafted). There was literally ONE good running back (and one okay starter) in the entire draft.

So the story there is that there is no guarantee that if you go after RBs that you’llbe able to get one that is decent. Maybe TT isn’t a terrible evaluater of RBs…maybe he just picked the wrong draft to fill the lineup with them. The next year he could have picked one of a dozen that turned into a pretty good to great ones!!

by TrevorR on Dec 5, 2009 7:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs