What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Could McGahee challenge for starters job? (1 Viewer)

J

JJ Evans

Footballguy
This is not a bash Henry thread. I find this very intriguing and think it seriously bumps Willis up the charts and Henry is a very risky play this year.

The Rochester Democrat & Chrnicle reports Bills RB Travis Henry is still the No. 1 running back, but never has a young NFL star been made to feel so unwanted or has his future seemed so uncertain. After his impressive NFL preseason debut Sunday night against the Denver Broncos, RB Willis McGahee's incredible comeback story from a devastating knee injury is starting to gain serious steam. Combine that with Henry's incredible insecurities, and Henry no longer seems like a lock to open the season as Buffalo's starting running back. HC Mike Mularkey was peppered with questions about Henry's comments about wanting a trade if he's no longer the starter and skillfully deflected them. Yes, Henry is still his No. 1 back, he said, but McGahee could challenge for the job, depending on how he did in the preseason games. It appears there may be a serious challenge in the works

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm, title misleading?Title = McGahee possibly to start week 1, From the head coach's mouth!Content = HC Mike Mularkey was peppered with questions about Henry's comments about wanting a trade if he's no longer the starter and skillfully deflected them. Yes, Henry is still his No. 1 back, he said, but McGahee could challenge for the job, depending on how he did in the preseason games.Explain to me how that's misleading? I say McGahee could start week 1 via the head coachs comments then I back it up with the head coaches comments saying McGahee could take the starting job if he performs in preseason via the head coach. I don't see the misleading information, seems pretty congruent to me.

 
:fishing: Come on, man.... I have barely been on these boards a month and I already know something like this isn't going to wash. This is "The Shark Pool"... people are not going to be suckered by posts like this...
 
The title of your thread is extremely misleading.

Mularkey said...

"Yes, Henry is still his No. 1 back, but McGahee could challenge for the job."

The Rochester Democrat & Chronicle said...

"Combine that with Henry's incredible insecurities, and Henry no longer seems like a lock to open the season as Buffalo's starting running back."

Big difference.

 
:fishing: Come on, man.... I have barely been on these boards a month and I already know something like this isn't going to wash. This is "The Shark Pool"... people are not going to be suckered by posts like this...
Click to expand...
What he said. :yes:
 
Hmm, title misleading?Title = McGahee possibly to start week 1, From the head coach's mouth!Content = HC Mike Mularkey was peppered with questions about Henry's comments about wanting a trade if he's no longer the starter and skillfully deflected them. Yes, Henry is still his No. 1 back, he said, but McGahee could challenge for the job, depending on how he did in the preseason games.Explain to me how that's misleading? I say McGahee could start week 1 via the head coachs comments then I back it up with the head coaches comments saying McGahee could take the starting job if he performs in preseason via the head coach. I don't see the misleading information, seems pretty congruent to me.
Click to expand...
Its misleading because nowhere does the HC say that McGahee could start week 1. He says McGahee could challenge for the starting job, which is not news. Of course he can challenge for the starting job - thats why he is there. This is the SAME story the Bills brass has spewed since McGahee was selected. McGahee can challenge for the starting job and might win it and start....in week 1, week 10, or 2005. To start a title that indicates "Week 1", which is YOUR assertion, not the HC's, is misleading.COlin
 
The title of your thread is extremely misleading.

Mularkey said...

"Yes, Henry is still his No. 1 back, but McGahee could challenge for the job."
Click to expand...
How is my title misleading? I don't get it, seriously. I said McGahee could "Possibly" start week 1, the head coach says "McGahee could challenge for the starting job".
 
Your thread title specifically said McGahee possible week 1 starter "From the Coaches Mouth"

Where in your post does Mularkey say McGahee is the possible starting RB week 1?

Do you have a quote you can provide us?

A link maybe?

Anything at all that supports your thread title?

If not, I think you should change your thread title, so at least it's accurate.

 
Hey, everybody wants to be the FBG who posts the red-hot NFL news first. But if you spin it too much (and your headline, JJ, comes very close to crossing the line), you end up spending the rest of your day defending your post and your message board cred instead of poring over your rankings or (gasp!) actually getting some work done around the house or office.

 
"Combine that with Henry's incredible insecurities, and Henry no longer seems like a lock to open the season as Buffalo's starting running back."These are not my words, this is from the link. How am I asserting these comments by posting the link content? :confused:

 
Hey, go easy on the "Dynomite" man.I agree that to say "Week 1" is a bit strong, but he's quoting directly from an article, not his own interpretation of what Mularkey and the beat writer are saying.

 
Your thread title specifically said McGahee possible week 1 starter "From the Coaches Mouth"

Where in your post does Mularkey say McGahee is the possible starting RB week 1?

Do you have a quote you can provide us?

A link maybe?

Anything at all that supports your thread title?

If not, I think you should change your thread title, so at least it's accurate.
Click to expand...
Guess I misconsrewed(sp) who said what, Title changed.
 
Well, the quotes you've provided certainly don't suggest that that any challenge by McGahee could result in him being a starter by week 1.Remember JJ, if you don't overstate things, people will think you are DYN-O-MITE! :D

 
Take it from me . . .

NEVER, EVER, EVER

use the words "McGahee" and "possibly" in the same sentence.

NOT EVER = NEVER

BAAAAAAAD things happen when you do that. Bad, bad things. Very, very bad things. Life altering things. Insanse asylum things.

PLEASE, let this be a lesson to everyone out there. Don't use those words together.

From now on, that will be known as

"the words we cannot speak of"

I know where of thy speak! DON'T GO THERE!!!!!!!

 
Bro, read what Colin and Weiner Dog wrote. Your title specifically says McGahee could start week 1, from the coaches mouth. NOWHERE in anything you have posted did Mularkey say anything even remotely resembling that. All he said was that McGahee could push for the starting role.... you even SPECIFICALLY quoted Mularkey as having said 'Henry is still the #1 back.' How does that equate to McGahee possibly starting week 1, from the coaches mouth? You also keep throwing that quote up about Henry no longer being a lock to start the season as the #1. That is nothing more than a journalist opining... it DID NOT COME FROM THE COACHES MOUTH, as you posted in your thread title. Thus the title is misleading. If you can't grasp this, please don't ever pursue a career in journalism, the hyperbole and sensationalism in our media is already so rampant, it's repulsive. Please let this be a refuge.....Edited to add : It seems, to your credit, you have received the point and changed the title. Well done, man.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
HC Mike Mularkey was peppered with questions about Henry's comments about wanting a trade if he's no longer the starter and skillfully deflected them. Yes, Henry is still his No. 1 back, he said, but McGahee could challenge for the job, depending on how he did in the preseason games.
Click to expand...
Nothing in those italicized part do I get the impression that McGahee could "possibly start week 1." He is "challenging" and that is it. It's all coach-speak. The coach HIMSELF says Henry is the #1 guy! :bag:
 
Thanks for changing the title. I think it more accurately reflects what the content within is. :thumbup: Discuss away...COlin
Click to expand...
I don't think the change in title has helped at all.There is simply no indication that McGahee will be the starter week 1. Anyone that goes to the trouble of opening this thread has wasted their time.
 
All this conflict aside, I think that this and everything else I have read out of Buffalo have led me to one conclusion : avoid Travis Henry. I say this despite the fact that all the McGahee hype is likely to make Henry a solid value pick, and here's why. I am getting to the point where I would not feel totally comfortable with Henry as a starter without having McGahee as a handcuff. If McGahee's stock keeps going up, the pick you'll have to burn to get McGahee destroys the value you get by picking Henry. I would rather draft a Michael Bennett, Rudi Johnson, or Curtis Martin - I'd be a lot more comfortable. It's going to get to the point where, if you draft Henry in Rd. 2, you're going to have to take McGahee in Rd 5-6... no value there. I am not using a 5th round pick on a guy who is likely never to get more than 5 carries in a game.

 
All this conflict aside, I think that this and everything else I have read out of Buffalo have led me to one conclusion : avoid Travis Henry. I say this despite the fact that all the McGahee hype is likely to make Henry a solid value pick, and here's why. I am getting to the point where I would not feel totally comfortable with Henry as a starter without having McGahee as a handcuff. If McGahee's stock keeps going up, the pick you'll have to burn to get McGahee destroys the value you get by picking Henry. I would rather draft a Michael Bennett, Rudi Johnson, or Curtis Martin - I'd be a lot more comfortable. It's going to get to the point where, if you draft Henry in Rd. 2, you're going to have to take McGahee in Rd 5-6... no value there. I am not using a 5th round pick on a guy who is likely never to get more than 5 carries in a game.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: This happened to me already. I keep hoping the Bills will give Henry his wish and ship him off to a team who'll make him their workhorse...today. :no: :noway:
 
The title of your thread is extremely misleading.

Mularkey said...

"Yes, Henry is still his No. 1 back, but McGahee could challenge for the job."
Click to expand...
How is my title misleading? I don't get it, seriously. I said McGahee could "Possibly" start week 1, the head coach says "McGahee could challenge for the starting job".
Click to expand...
Yeah, and monkeys could "possibly" fly out of my butt...This Henry/McGahee talk is some of the most ridiculous stuff I've read, well, excluding the Dayne/Barber and Griffin/Bell stuff of course. :loco:

 
The title of your thread is extremely misleading.

Mularkey said...

"Yes, Henry is still his No. 1 back, but McGahee could challenge for the job."
Click to expand...
How is my title misleading? I don't get it, seriously. I said McGahee could "Possibly" start week 1, the head coach says "McGahee could challenge for the starting job".
Click to expand...
Yeah, and monkeys could "possibly" fly out of my butt...This Henry/McGahee talk is some of the most ridiculous stuff I've read, well, excluding the Dayne/Barber and Griffin/Bell stuff of course. :loco:
Click to expand...
No discussion like this is really ridiculous...it's worth hashing out even the situations you believe to be completely unlikely.Had someone posted that Dom Davis would be the Texans leading rusher last preseason...we would've had 90%+ of the responses ridiculing him for such a statement, pointing out that Davis was a rookie with less than ideal size who was facing an uphill battle against Allen, Wells, Mack and Hollings.

Had someone suggested that the Eagles would use a 3-man RBBC and manage to rush for over 2,000 yards and 30 touchdowns between them; they would've either been labeled a homer or insane.

Things happen...better to think them through, after all, why is this board here if not to discuss the nuances of the sport. We have nothing to gain if we simply accept the average draft rankings as gospel and move on from there, right?

 
I don't think the Bills drafted McGahee to sit on the bench.McGahee was graded out as one of the most talented backs in college - right up there with LTII.20 Months removed from injury.Let's be honest...is Henry really as talented as McGahee? I reside in the "No" camp, firmly.And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

 
I don't think the Bills drafted McGahee to sit on the bench.McGahee was graded out as one of the most talented backs in college - right up there with LTII.20 Months removed from injury.Let's be honest...is Henry really as talented as McGahee? I reside in the "No" camp, firmly.And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.
Click to expand...
Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.
 
Much ado about nadda.I would be shocked if the Bills went with McGahee this year who has had zero regular season experience over Henry who is an annual pro-bowl candidate. That being said, one will be playing elsewhere in 2005 and I wouldn't surprise me if it was Henry.

 
I don't think the Bills drafted McGahee to sit on the bench.McGahee was graded out as one of the most talented backs in college - right up there with LTII.20 Months removed from injury.Let's be honest...is Henry really as talented as McGahee? I reside in the "No" camp, firmly.And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.
Click to expand...
Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.
Click to expand...
The only thing remotely close to this is the McAllister/Williams situation a few years ago. McAllister never got his shot until Williams was gone.
 
Had someone posted that Dom Davis would be the Texans leading rusher last preseason...we would've had 90%+ of the responses ridiculing him for such a statement, pointing out that Davis was a rookie with less than ideal size who was facing an uphill battle against Allen, Wells, Mack and Hollings.Had someone suggested that the Eagles would use a 3-man RBBC and manage to rush for over 2,000 yards and 30 touchdowns between them; they would've either been labeled a homer or insane.
Click to expand...
And had someone posted that Anquan Boldin would be the next Randy Moss, he would have been ridiculed endlessly about how rookie receivers don't perform and the Cardinals don't have a good QB and Boldin just isn't that good. But the thread certainly would have proved useful to anyone who didn't immediately dismiss it.In fact, that actually happened.Agree with Jason, any discussion like this can be useful.
 
Had someone posted that Dom Davis would be the Texans leading rusher last preseason...we would've had 90%+ of the responses ridiculing him for such a statement, pointing out that Davis was a rookie with less than ideal size who was facing an uphill battle against Allen, Wells, Mack and Hollings.Had someone suggested that the Eagles would use a 3-man RBBC and manage to rush for over 2,000 yards and 30 touchdowns between them; they would've either been labeled a homer or insane.
Click to expand...
First of all, there wasn't a Pro Bowler sitting ahead of Dom Davis on the depth chart. Was he at a disadvantage, yes, but not nearly the one faced by McGahee to allegedly be in the running to start game one.Secondly the Phillies situation isn't completely ridiculous. Only Westbrook was a huge surprise. Buckhalter and Staley were pretty decent in seasons prior.But it's interesting that you point out those two situations, as no one was predicting either Davis or Westbrook to break out. They were completely random events that no one could have planned for, which is what makes all of this ramant speculation on McGahee ridiculous. The "next big thing" for RBs could just as easily come out of nowhere as it could be McGahee, so why all of the focus on McGahee?Additionally, this thread was meant to be misleading from the start. Sure, McGahee could "possibly" be the starter for week one, but Chris Perry could "possibly" be the starter for week one as well. It's all speculation and conjecture until Sept. 12th comes around. There was no new evidence or news that gave McGahee any greater opportunity than his already slim chance to start week one.This is just a way for JJ Evans to draw attention to himself, nothing more. It adds nothing significant to the ongoing Henry/McGahee speculation.
 
Here's the link: Mon_D&C

It was written Monday after McGahee's 'big' game. Yet another hype article. Notice last line from writer: "Well, as of Sunday night, the job is a toss-up." No informed writer who knew the situation would even consider this. And by the way, knowledgeable sports fans here in Rochester do not hold this writer in high regard. His articles always tend to lean whichever way the wind is blowing.

 
I've read a lot of whispers from the players on the opposing D's that McGahee has faced this pre season and in scrimmage, where they say he still looks a little hesitant with his knee. It's still not quite 2 years since McGahee suffered the injury. I reckon Henry is the guy for the Bills this year, with a little bit of McGahee thrown in. The Bills trade Henry next year. McGahee assumes the mantle of the Bills fulltime RB in 2005.My .02 anyway

 
But it's interesting that you point out those two situations, as no one was predicting either Davis or Westbrook to break out. They were completely random events that no one could have planned for, which is what makes all of this ramant speculation on McGahee ridiculous. The "next big thing" for RBs could just as easily come out of nowhere as it could be McGahee, so why all of the focus on McGahee?
Click to expand...
Completely random? You mean God is just going to put all the names of backup RBs in a hat, pull out a few names and those guys will break out?Certainly football can be a tough game to predict and things will happen that very few of us see coming. But its not "completely random" by any stretch of the imagination. Some players are more likely to break out than others, and if you want to win at FF it makes sense to figure out which ones. I would think that Willis McGahee, being a dominant college player and 1st round draft choice, would have a better chance than most backups.
 
Why is this a bash JJ Evans thread? I changed the title, by my own volition noticed my error in understanding who said what in the article. Let's all gang up and bash on Kid Dynomite. :yes:

 
Why is this a bash JJ Evans thread? I changed the title, by my own volition noticed my error in understanding who said what in the article. Let's all gang up and bash on Kid Dynomite.
Click to expand...
:violin: Said in my very best Major Payne voice:

Maybe...it's because you put up a missleading thread title to begin with.

Maybe...it's because you started out trying to defend your missleading thread title.

Maybe...it's because of some of your comments in other threads (Green / Suggs & Boldin injury).

NOW DROP DOWN AND GIVE ME TWENTY MAGGOT! :angry:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why is this a bash JJ Evans thread? I changed the title, by my own volition noticed my error in understanding who said what in the article. Let's all gang up and bash on Kid Dynomite.
Click to expand...
:violin: Said in my very best Major Payne voice:

Maybe...it's because you put up a missleading thread title to begin with.

Maybe...it's because you started out trying to defend your missleading thread title.

Maybe...it's because of some of your comments in other threads (Green / Suggs & Boldin injury).

NOW DROP DOWN AND GIVE ME TWENTY MAGGOT! :angry:
Click to expand...
You're always the guy all over my case... and other people too when it's fashionable. Either you have a small D*** or you're very insecure about something else... acne? weight? plain ole ugly? It's a mystery as to which one it is. :nerd:
 
But it's interesting that you point out those two situations, as no one was predicting either Davis or Westbrook to break out. They were completely random events that no one could have planned for, which is what makes all of this ramant speculation on McGahee ridiculous. The "next big thing" for RBs could just as easily come out of nowhere as it could be McGahee, so why all of the focus on McGahee?
Click to expand...
Completely random? You mean God is just going to put all the names of backup RBs in a hat, pull out a few names and those guys will break out?Certainly football can be a tough game to predict and things will happen that very few of us see coming. But its not "completely random" by any stretch of the imagination. Some players are more likely to break out than others, and if you want to win at FF it makes sense to figure out which ones. I would think that Willis McGahee, being a dominant college player and 1st round draft choice, would have a better chance than most backups.
Click to expand...
Completely random meaning that one month prior to the start of the season, I don't think any fantasy football experts, or football experts in general, would have told you that Brian Westbrook would be the most productive back in Philly, or that Dom Davis would take over the starting job and gain over 1,000 yards in Houston. Sure, there might have been a few people who said, "Hey this kid has some potential", but both of those cases were a complete surprise.Sure, you're right, McGahee does have a ton of talent, and normally he would be a good break out candidate. However, as it stands, Buffalo still has a Pro Bowl RB sitting ahead of McGahee on the depth chart. Any fantasy football player needs opportunity to have that "breakout" season, and I just don't see how McGahee is going to get that opportunity this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jumper
Could you make an open field tackle to stop an NFL starting RB from gaining 10 yards on a rush for $1mm?
2
Replies
70
Views
2K
Junior McSpiffy
Junior McSpiffy
Ministry of Pain
Exploit/Avoid Week 1...You drafted Studs, the real challenge is the RB2/WR3/Flex spots for most folks
2 3
Replies
112
Views
5K
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain
One
D'Onta Foreman 2020 - The Comeback (Titans)
Replies
6
Views
558
ahartig
ahartig

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top