Marion Barber

We definitely need a change of pace back. I just don't think Barber is that guy. I've seen a lot of cowboys games unfortunately (bc I live in Austin) and although I root against them, I can objectively say that he's not what he used to be. I'd rather go for Tolbert or somebody else younger. Maybe we can trade Tampa for Blount.

 

apparently the word "depth" was lost on some

 

Tolbert or Michael Bush, I'd even Willis Mcgahee I'd rather take over Barber.

 

Tell me a team that is truly 3 deep at RB, and how they are better because of it. It's one of the least important, and most easily replaceable positions in the entire league right now. We can draft someone in the 6th round better than Barber, who has more upside and less baggage. It would be a stupid move regardless of "depth".

 

We hardly ever had a #3 during the Eddie George days.

And no, depth was not lost on anyone.


Sorry that I don't think the Titans should go out and pickup whatever name pops up just because they were released.

It is more important to have someone useful for special teams than to have a deactivated #3 RB.

Having a #3 RB who is inactive is not having depth.

 

You nitpicked an irrelevant flaw and got a boner. It should have been obvious my point was Blount would have never played as long as he was associated with us...maybe you just didn't get the point so you ignored it.

And since you do now, pure speculation? Rubbish. You have to be fool to think otherwise. Ringer had no reason to lose carries.

 

Are you retarded or something? I've already stated that Blount would have likely been deactivated on game day. But I don't phrase it in absolutes. If he had made the roster maybe he beats out ringer as the season progresses or maybe they don't deactivate him so they could have a power back ready. We'll never know at this point.

I didn't nitpick anything irrelevant. You said they were going to put him on the PS and not cut him and I pointed out that it doesn't work like that.

 

No, are you? It's an irrelevant blunder because he would have never had a chance, that doesn't change. Sure, technically, you can call it speculation, but if you can't put it together and still want to call it pure speculation, then I don't know what to tell you except good luck with the complex stuff in life... beat out Ringer? Ringer got like 50 carries and he played well. There just weren't many opportunities for Blount to even beat out Ringer even if he did suit up.

 

You get a lot of Giants games, don't you?

 

If you think Jones' 3.7 yards a carry somehow paved the way for Charles great season you are crazy. They just don't think or didn't think when the season started that Charles could handle a full time load of carries. If they thought that Charles should have gotten 2/3 of the carries he was the better back. I guess soemthing could be said about Charles always being fresh but that has nothing to do with a change of pace.

Makes no sense a guy who averaged 3.7 is the reason another guy averaged 6.4? Come on.

No he is not he's just an older back who is slowing down while Charles is at the top of his game. Any back could have done what Jones did behind that line. Ringer certainly could have done as well or better.