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.

Jeremy Hill, RB (LVR) (3 Viewers)

Dave Lapham talked about Hill's performance so far yesterday on local radio. If you aren't familiar, he's the radio announcer and very informed with the team. He said Hill doesn't look at all the same to him and he thinks he's likely not 100%. He also said he thinks later in the year we will see harder running and, in return, bigger usage games.
Hill looks nothing like last year. Maybe he is injured to some extent but if so, why haven't we heard about it?
I have heard he has some sort of a knee injury. I do not know the extent of it. Obviously it is not an injury that prevents him from playing or practicing. I have not really noticed any hitch steps or stuff like that when watching him play. But perhaps there is something to this that is making Hill less comfortable running the ball.

 
Not making excuses for the guy, (because the Sharks in here HATE excuses) but I was thinking the same thing. Hue continues to stress the fact that Hill is the starter. Why would he continue to do that seeing how well Gio is playing and how poorly Hill is playing? Likely because he knows something we don't. Or sees something we don't. I thought Hill was done when he twisted his knee a few weeks ago. But he paced around like a rabid dog, jumped on the bike and was back in the game. (It was his two fumble game). If he is injured, why haven't we heard about it? Some guys just don't wear their injuries like badges of honor. Everyone is injured. Why advertise it? How would it benefit him? How many people go around saying, "I am not playing well because I am hurt." Few, if any. You deal with it, don't make excuses, and heal up just like the rest of the players. At least the tough ones do. We usually find out at the end of the year that the guy was dealing with a sprained MCL or high ankle sprain. Hill is a prideful guy. Until Hue backs off him and moves out of his corner, I am not too worried. Does it suck for my team? Yes. But I am in a dynasty league and the guy is 23 years old. I have other pieces in place to make up for his low production.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...

 
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...
Because Gio can't withstand 25+ touches a game and the Bengals are winning doing what they're doing now.

 
T with T said:
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...
They did last year. He was a hit away from literally breaking in half.

 
T with T said:
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...
Just look at last year, Gio just can't stand up to that kind of punishment and it will affect his performance. He was averaging like 4.0 yards per carry with that kind of work load and then got hurt. This is the role he is built for, average about 12 to 15 touches a game, he will give you a higher YPC that way and he is a major asset in the passing game.

 
*dynasty*

As has been said, lack of catches hurts his PPR format value. In that system, are you owners sticking with and building around or are you selling? What price would move him?

 
jurb26 said:
cheese said:
Dave Lapham talked about Hill's performance so far yesterday on local radio. If you aren't familiar, he's the radio announcer and very informed with the team. He said Hill doesn't look at all the same to him and he thinks he's likely not 100%. He also said he thinks later in the year we will see harder running and, in return, bigger usage games.
Hill looks nothing like last year. Maybe he is injured to some extent but if so, why haven't we heard about
Week 2 I beleive he got hurt on his first fumble, he stayed in the game and fumbled again. I've thought in the back of my mind he has been hurt since that game.

 
RenegadeRoy said:
T with T said:
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...
Because Gio can't withstand 25+ touches a game and the Bengals are winning doing what they're doing now.
This is :bs: is there something magical about touch 25 that causes Bernard to turn into a pumpkin and get injured?

Bernard averaged 23 touches/game in college and exceeded 25 touches in a game 9 out of 23 games played.

Bernard has only had over 25 touches in an NFL game once. Week 2 of 2014 where Bernard had 27 rushing attempts 90 yards 1TD 5 receptions for 79 yards.

Jermey Hill averaged 15 touches/game in college and exceeded 25 touches in a game 5 out of 24 games played.

Hill has over 25 touches four times in the NFL. Those games were against Jacksonville, Saints, Cleveland and the Steelers. The first 3 were games where the Bengals blew the other team out. The Bengals lost the game to the Steelers in the last week of the 2014 season.

 
jurb26 said:
cheese said:
Dave Lapham talked about Hill's performance so far yesterday on local radio. If you aren't familiar, he's the radio announcer and very informed with the team. He said Hill doesn't look at all the same to him and he thinks he's likely not 100%. He also said he thinks later in the year we will see harder running and, in return, bigger usage games.
Hill looks nothing like last year. Maybe he is injured to some extent but if so, why haven't we heard about
Week 2 I beleive he got hurt on his first fumble, he stayed in the game and fumbled again. I've thought in the back of my mind he has been hurt since that game.
I forgot about that, his knee got twisted (which may have been why he fumbled in the first place).

Hill was on the injury report last week, I think listed Q mid-week (saw on MFL?), before P Friday. Dalton is playing extremely well, and even receiving some MVP buzz, but he doesn't have a big arm, so when the weather turns in the AFC North, they may run more later in the season.

 
BF, you make some good points at times, but it's drowned out by your inability to be objective...
"...The big difference, though, is that i haven't been back here saying, humpback, you're wrong. I'm not here to argue with people and tell them who's wrong and get board cred. I haven't gone back and quoted some if the statements you guys have made in this thread..."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
T with T said:
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...
Because the depth chart is irrelevant. Who cares which guy in the nominal starter?

Right now, Gio is the back getting the most snaps, by far.

 
BF, you make some good points at times, but it's drowned out by your inability to be objective...
"...The big difference, though, is that i haven't been back here saying, humpback, you're wrong. I'm not here to argue with people and tell them who's wrong and get board cred. I haven't gone back and quoted some if the statements you guys have made in this thread..."
Every single post I bumped was a criticism of my posts. Every single one. I didn't come back to poke fun at your bad calls. I watched you guys tap dance and declare victory while I stayed true to my opinion. If you're embarrassed that you were mocking me for liking freeman over hill, that's on you.
 
And all of that will be monstrously irrelevant if Hill's situation (carry distribution in the RBBC) doesn't remain EXACTLY the same next year as it was in the first 13 games of his rookie season, with no possibility of an uptick in usage if he proves the better pure runner to Bernard (who can get more receptions as a touch equalizer).

* If you were talking about Freeman, he has less than a 1% chance of ever being a 1,600 yard rusher. That was close, though, only off by about a COUPLE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE. :)
Less than 1%
Here's me quoting your post, where you mocked me for liking freeman over hill and told me how I was wrong by (ALL CAPS) a couple orders of magnitude. I made a post which is almost entirely correct, and you couldn't respond to it with respect. You had to call it irrelevant. Wait, no, monstrously irrelevant.

"... i also acknowledge that was dead wrong about his dynasty trade value - it went through the roof when he blew up during the second half of the season..."
Agreed.
Here you are, looking for negative things. Again. Because that's what you do. You constantly attack people who disagree. Shameful.
 
These guys are fond of making fun of me for liking freeman over hill, but truth be told, I still do. Because I can go hit a hill next year at a discounted rate, but if freeman gets that job next year, he ought be unattainable. That doesn't mean i think it's a sure thing that he will, just that I'm willing to gamble on a potential stud over a likely mediocre fantasy player.
This was the "monstrously irrelevant" post about freeman btw.
 
You guys should get a room. Maybe start another thread "I was wrong/right about J. Hill / D. Freeman" and go at it. I just want to come in here and see updates on Hill.

 
You guys should get a room. Maybe start another thread "I was wrong/right about J. Hill / D. Freeman" and go at it. I just want to come in here and see updates on Hill.
Yes!
Maybe you guys should got to Rotoworld and put Hill's name in the box in the upper right corner and hit "return". You'll then get all the news and latest updates you want. This is a message board where people have discussions and sometimes they take twist and turns and occasionally you'll see two people going back and forth on some disagreement they had. And then you'll see people that come in and whine about how they don't like what those people are talking about and ask for people to talk only about what they want to talk about - seems kind of selfish but so it goes. Sometimes these "back and forths" get a little personal and should probably be reigned back a bit, but sometimes there's actually good disucssion and different philosophies and strategies to be gleamed from them.

 
You guys should get a room. Maybe start another thread "I was wrong/right about J. Hill / D. Freeman" and go at it. I just want to come in here and see updates on Hill.
Yes!
Maybe you guys should got to Rotoworld and put Hill's name in the box in the upper right corner and hit "return". You'll then get all the news and latest updates you want. This is a message board where people have discussions and sometimes they take twist and turns and occasionally you'll see two people going back and forth on some disagreement they had. And then you'll see people that come in and whine about how they don't like what those people are talking about and ask for people to talk only about what they want to talk about - seems kind of selfish but so it goes. Sometimes these "back and forths" get a little personal and should probably be reigned back a bit, but sometimes there's actually good disucssion and different philosophies and strategies to be gleamed from them.
Point taken. But this seems to have gone beyond constructive usefulness.

 
You guys should get a room. Maybe start another thread "I was wrong/right about J. Hill / D. Freeman" and go at it. I just want to come in here and see updates on Hill.
Yes!
Maybe you guys should got to Rotoworld and put Hill's name in the box in the upper right corner and hit "return". You'll then get all the news and latest updates you want. This is a message board where people have discussions and sometimes they take twist and turns and occasionally you'll see two people going back and forth on some disagreement they had. And then you'll see people that come in and whine about how they don't like what those people are talking about and ask for people to talk only about what they want to talk about - seems kind of selfish but so it goes. Sometimes these "back and forths" get a little personal and should probably be reigned back a bit, but sometimes there's actually good disucssion and different philosophies and strategies to be gleamed from them.
There is a difference between healthy debate and I told you so. Lastly, Rotoworld for quality information? Seriously? Lol.
 
While you two debate that, here's my .02 on hill for this weekend.

Bills run defense is top 3. They are capable of getting a pass rush without rushing extra guys, and they have a corner who will get some single coverage with aj green so they can play man on the Bengals strong wide receivers. If they're going to double someone, it might be eifert, not green. So in most formations, the Bengals will be facing 7 or 8 in the box.

The Bengals have talked up hill a little recently, so there's some chance that they get him more involved. But it seems like they should try to spread out this defense and attack the perimeter, which seems to favor gio. And if hill is indeed hurt, that only makes it more of a gio game.

There are really two ways that I can see the game going hill's way. First is if the Bengals decide to power run early to free up eifert. That's possible, but with Gilmore likely to man cover green a good amount I don't think they need to scheme the receivers open and I think they're wise to spread that defense out. Second is if the Bengals get out to an early lead and can run it out. If tyrod sits, that's a real possibility, although the return of Mccoy could lead to a very quick game if the bills are running the ball from the go. Outside of those two game flows, you're looking for hill to break a big run or pick up some td opportunities that shake out of the rat of the offense, and against a tough d that's not a good gamble to take.

So in general in (surprise) down on hill this week, but if you're swinging for the fences and have to choose between him and a low end option he has high upside despite the low probability of success. Id call him a good tournament play for daily, but his price is a little high for what you get as a floor.

 
RenegadeRoy said:
T with T said:
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...
Because Gio can't withstand 25+ touches a game and the Bengals are winning doing what they're doing now.
This is :bs: is there something magical about touch 25 that causes Bernard to turn into a pumpkin and get injured?

Bernard averaged 23 touches/game in college and exceeded 25 touches in a game 9 out of 23 games played.

Bernard has only had over 25 touches in an NFL game once. Week 2 of 2014 where Bernard had 27 rushing attempts 90 yards 1TD 5 receptions for 79 yards.

Jermey Hill averaged 15 touches/game in college and exceeded 25 touches in a game 5 out of 24 games played.

Hill has over 25 touches four times in the NFL. Those games were against Jacksonville, Saints, Cleveland and the Steelers. The first 3 were games where the Bengals blew the other team out. The Bengals lost the game to the Steelers in the last week of the 2014 season.
What kind of touches they had in college doesn't matter. While some of those guys will play in the NFL most won't. Bernard's body could handle the punishment of college, not the NFL. Bernard also went to LSU, and I don't watch a lot of college football, I am pretty sure the they use multiple backs in there system. Well, not right now because they have that Fournette guy.

Look at the size difference too.

Bernard 5'9 205

Hill 6'1 235

Bernard's body just can't take that kind of punishment, it doesn't mean he isn't a good player, he just isn't a every down player. Maybe Hill isn't either.

 
Gio played for North Carolina on Saturdays.

Playing BUF is definitely a Gio game.

The only way I can see Hill being a factor is if CIN gets up big early and starts killing clock.

But predicting game flow is a dangerous game.

 
Gio played for North Carolina on Saturdays.

Playing BUF is definitely a Gio game.

The only way I can see Hill being a factor is if CIN gets up big early and starts killing clock.

But predicting game flow is a dangerous game.
Buf best run stopper is supposed to be out for this game.
 
While you two debate that, here's my .02 on hill for this weekend.

Bills run defense is top 3. They are capable of getting a pass rush without rushing extra guys, and they have a corner who will get some single coverage with aj green so they can play man on the Bengals strong wide receivers. If they're going to double someone, it might be eifert, not green. So in most formations, the Bengals will be facing 7 or 8 in the box.

The Bengals have talked up hill a little recently, so there's some chance that they get him more involved. But it seems like they should try to spread out this defense and attack the perimeter, which seems to favor gio. And if hill is indeed hurt, that only makes it more of a gio game.

There are really two ways that I can see the game going hill's way. First is if the Bengals decide to power run early to free up eifert. That's possible, but with Gilmore likely to man cover green a good amount I don't think they need to scheme the receivers open and I think they're wise to spread that defense out. Second is if the Bengals get out to an early lead and can run it out. If tyrod sits, that's a real possibility, although the return of Mccoy could lead to a very quick game if the bills are running the ball from the go. Outside of those two game flows, you're looking for hill to break a big run or pick up some td opportunities that shake out of the rat of the offense, and against a tough d that's not a good gamble to take.

So in general in (surprise) down on hill this week, but if you're swinging for the fences and have to choose between him and a low end option he has high upside despite the low probability of success. Id call him a good tournament play for daily, but his price is a little high for what you get as a floor.
Now we're talkin' --thanks for input BF

 
You guys should get a room. Maybe start another thread "I was wrong/right about J. Hill / D. Freeman" and go at it. I just want to come in here and see updates on Hill.
Yes!
Maybe you guys should got to Rotoworld and put Hill's name in the box in the upper right corner and hit "return". You'll then get all the news and latest updates you want. This is a message board where people have discussions and sometimes they take twist and turns and occasionally you'll see two people going back and forth on some disagreement they had. And then you'll see people that come in and whine about how they don't like what those people are talking about and ask for people to talk only about what they want to talk about - seems kind of selfish but so it goes. Sometimes these "back and forths" get a little personal and should probably be reigned back a bit, but sometimes there's actually good disucssion and different philosophies and strategies to be gleamed from them.
There is a difference between healthy debate and I told you so. Lastly, Rotoworld for quality information? Seriously? Lol.
Your reading comprehension is atrocious.

 
BF, you make some good points at times, but it's drowned out by your inability to be objective...
"...The big difference, though, is that i haven't been back here saying, humpback, you're wrong. I'm not here to argue with people and tell them who's wrong and get board cred. I haven't gone back and quoted some if the statements you guys have made in this thread..."
Every single post I bumped was a criticism of my posts. Every single one. I didn't come back to poke fun at your bad calls. I watched you guys tap dance and declare victory while I stayed true to my opinion. If you're embarrassed that you were mocking me for liking freeman over hill, that's on you.
THREAD SKIP ALERT (if not interested)

I ordinarily might discuss this via PM, but that is precluded by the fact that BF earlier related a PM discussion in this very thread (while characteristically misrepresenting it). I'd be remiss to not warn others if they PM him, they run the risk of him doing the same, given his history.

Whatever, you are doing what you said you don't do. The self-righteous indignation rings hollow, and if you think you haven't poked fun at others, you are as delusional as you seem (it is possible to defend your views and poke fun at others, you have done it constantly, they aren't mutually exclusive). Your very first post in the thread basically had the subtext that you would have to be an idiot to not realize Hill was useless. Throughout the thread you have chastised and scolded the thread for things you do yourself.

It is a recurring pattern and theme. You are a reflexive blamer, demonize others for the exact same things you do, have a disturbing persecution complex and pathological inability to accept responsibility for your contributions and role in communication failures.

You admitted you were dead wrong about Hill's valuation last year. Others agreed. Making of it anything but that is another example of the need to twist things to make others wrong and yourself right, ABOUT LAST YEAR. Last year was a combination of you being the most prolific poster in the thread (and when single posts repeated mantra-like roster poison, roster poison, roster poison, roster poison, roster poison, roster poison, roster poison, roster poison, roster poison, roster poison, etc., at some point it became oppressive and went beyond being a nuisance - we got it, you thought he was roster poison last year, even though Hill was the #1 rusher in the second half of last season, you didn't need to repeat it hundreds of times), and having some wacky, nutty, zany ideas. RB2s are useless, the great Jermaine Gresham would contribute to suppressing Hill's emergence last year, it is better to have a RB you never think of starting because you can drop him. I could go on. If negative attention was brought to Boston Fred in the thread, Boston Fred shares some responsibility. Maybe the good BF should have a pow wow or tete-a-tete with the evil BF, so the master/witness BF can sort it out. :)

 
"... i also acknowledge that was dead wrong about his dynasty trade value - it went through the roof when he blew up during the second half of the season..."
Agreed.
Here you are, looking for negative things. Again. Because that's what you do. You constantly attack people who disagree. Shameful.
THREAD SKIP ALERT 2.0 (if not interested)

I referenced revisionist history up-thread. The "perfect storm" narrative is shaping the narrative to fit your purposes. Bernard missed three games. His Y/C average was the same before and after the injury, and his rookie year. Was he injured continuously his first two seasons? Bernard wouldn't have lost his job due to a mere three game absence, on strictly medical grounds, unless he was outplayed. Hill was not the only rookie RB in league history to be given an opportunity from an injury to the starter. Hill was not the only rookie RB in league history to play on a team in which passing game weapons were hurt. He is the only rookie RB in league history to have four games of 147+ (145+?) rushing yards in league history. While he may never have broken the record without the opportunity, the opportunity by itself doesn't suffice to explain the historical accomplishment (it cracked the door, but he broke it down). If injuries to other skill positions were all it took, there would be dozens if not hundreds of rookie RBs with four 147+ yard games. Yet there are a grand total of zero others. I have seen no credible responses to this critique critique.

You correct people all the time. When I reminded you that you corrected YOURSELF, LAST YEAR, that is being negative, attacking and shameful. Its just more evidence amidst countless other instances in the thread of being a reflexive blamer, demonizing others for the exact same things you do yourself, having a disturbing persecution complex and pathological inability to accept responsibility for the contributions and role you have played at times in the propagation of negativity in the thread (you are doing it now out of one side of your mouth, while denying it with the other side of your mouth, Boston Janus). Your feelings got hurt when statements like I realize Hill helped win championships but still think he is roster poison weren't well received. Rather than lash out at others for questioning that upside down logic, consider the possibility it was received the way it was because it made absolutely zero sense, LAST YEAR (like, you know, when you were saying it). If Hill never does anything other than help owners win a championship in his rookie season, he was arguably worth the second round pick he typically cost. He still has less than a season's worth of starts, so he still has the remainder of his career to add to that good will.

I'm not going to dignify the last point beyond noting you long ago abdicated the right to moralize when you relayed a misrepresented PM in the thread, the most singularly hinky and juvenile act I've ever seen in the SP (decade plus). You acted hysterically. In order to take your criticism seriously, you would have to not be a hypocrite, but the recurring theme and pattern of your actions and exchanges in the thread make that impossible.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The big difference, though, is that i haven't been back here saying, humpback, you're wrong. I'm not here to argue with people and tell them who's wrong and get board cred. I haven't gone back and quoted some if the statements you guys have made in this thread. I'm not fighting, I'm defending my point.

Once again, you choose to make a personal comment out of this, just like the last couple posters who have said I was being dishonest or criticizing me for not currently playing in as many dynasty leagues as they do. This is the worst of the shark pool right here, when people try to pile on opposing view points and attack each other.
you cut off the bolded when you quoted me. Just to make clear, I think it's fine to go back and highlight your good calls and discuss them more. It's good to look at what other people said at the time and understand the context. What I haven't done is gone back and looked for negative things to say about you. That's what you just spent over an hour of your weekend doing. When people asked us to stop arguing, I posted my thoughts on the game this weekend. You came back with more personal bickering.

If you don't see the difference, I can't help you.

 
While you two debate that, here's my .02 on hill for this weekend.

Bills run defense is top 3. They are capable of getting a pass rush without rushing extra guys, and they have a corner who will get some single coverage with aj green so they can play man on the Bengals strong wide receivers. If they're going to double someone, it might be eifert, not green. So in most formations, the Bengals will be facing 7 or 8 in the box.

The Bengals have talked up hill a little recently, so there's some chance that they get him more involved. But it seems like they should try to spread out this defense and attack the perimeter, which seems to favor gio. And if hill is indeed hurt, that only makes it more of a gio game.

There are really two ways that I can see the game going hill's way. First is if the Bengals decide to power run early to free up eifert. That's possible, but with Gilmore likely to man cover green a good amount I don't think they need to scheme the receivers open and I think they're wise to spread that defense out. Second is if the Bengals get out to an early lead and can run it out. If tyrod sits, that's a real possibility, although the return of Mccoy could lead to a very quick game if the bills are running the ball from the go. Outside of those two game flows, you're looking for hill to break a big run or pick up some td opportunities that shake out of the rat of the offense, and against a tough d that's not a good gamble to take.

So in general in (surprise) down on hill this week, but if you're swinging for the fences and have to choose between him and a low end option he has high upside despite the low probability of success. Id call him a good tournament play for daily, but his price is a little high for what you get as a floor.
Now we're talkin' --thanks for input BF
You're welcome. Sorry to get the thread off track.
 
THREAD SKIP ALERT 3.0 (if not interested)

All of this is consistent with a serial blamer who reflexively demonizes others for doing the exact same things he does (there is no difference), with a persecution complex and inability to accept responsibility for his contributions and role in the miscommunication. It is exactly what I have come to expect. You are always right, and everybody else is always at fault. Same as it ever was. Got it.

Who would need or want help from somebody that already recused themselves from moralizing detail with the poor judgement to relay a misrepresented PM in the thread?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RenegadeRoy said:
T with T said:
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...
Because Gio can't withstand 25+ touches a game and the Bengals are winning doing what they're doing now.
This is :bs: is there something magical about touch 25 that causes Bernard to turn into a pumpkin and get injured?

Bernard averaged 23 touches/game in college and exceeded 25 touches in a game 9 out of 23 games played.

Bernard has only had over 25 touches in an NFL game once. Week 2 of 2014 where Bernard had 27 rushing attempts 90 yards 1TD 5 receptions for 79 yards.

Jermey Hill averaged 15 touches/game in college and exceeded 25 touches in a game 5 out of 24 games played.

Hill has over 25 touches four times in the NFL. Those games were against Jacksonville, Saints, Cleveland and the Steelers. The first 3 were games where the Bengals blew the other team out. The Bengals lost the game to the Steelers in the last week of the 2014 season.
What kind of touches they had in college doesn't matter. While some of those guys will play in the NFL most won't. Bernard's body could handle the punishment of college, not the NFL. Bernard also went to LSU, and I don't watch a lot of college football, I am pretty sure the they use multiple backs in there system. Well, not right now because they have that Fournette guy.

Look at the size difference too.

Bernard 5'9 205

Hill 6'1 235

Bernard's body just can't take that kind of punishment, it doesn't mean he isn't a good player, he just isn't a every down player. Maybe Hill isn't either.
I don't think the size has anything to do with a players ability to maintain endurance and play at the same level after 20 touches as they did on the first touch.

Adrian Peterson was talking about this recently. How he has been doing some additional conditioning work to ensure he is ready for 30 touches a game if called on to do that. He said some RB cannot do that. That is does take extra conditioning to build the stamina to be running with the same energy late in the game as you do at the beginning of the game.

No where does he talk about size as being a factor in handling a lot of touches.

The college stats illustrate that Bernard can and has handled more than 25 touches in a game frequently. It is pretty hard to evaluate a player on such an arbitrary number as 25 touches in a game when the player has only had such an opportunity one time in their career. I don't watch much college football but yes I am quite aware that Hill shared time with Blue and Spencer Ware and that LSU usually rotate RB because as one of the best recruiting teams they often have an abundance of riches at all positions.

I do not see any evidence to support the claim that Bernard cannot handle feature RB touches.

Injuries can happen at any time. The first play of the game or the last. The idea put forth here is that Bernard has demonstrated poor endurance or a lack of toughness based on the faulty logic of the players height and weight and that is just wrong.

The Bengals have a philosophy related to this in that they want to limit their RB to a number of touches that is below that threshold. That is what they have been doing for years and since Hue Jackson became involved with their offense.

In the four games that Hill did meet this 25 touch threshold two of them happened while Bernard was out with injury, against Jacksonville and New Orleans. The third game was against Cleveland in a 30 to 0 blowout where Manziel got his first start IIRC. Bernard had 18 touches and over 100 combined yards in this game as well.

It just doesn't happen very often for a RB to get this many touches in todays NFL. It was an arbitrary number picked to fit the argument and has nothing to do with a bench mark that proves a RB is a workhorse or not. 25 touches a game is 400 over the course of a full season and obviously a rare mark for any player to reach over the course of a season. If a player does have over 400 then people start worrying the player will break down. It is not really a fair bench mark to measure any player by because of how rare it is for a RB to get the ball this much.

Adrian Peterson has never had 400 touches in a season. The closest he came to this workload was 388 in 2012. Obviously the threshold for a RB "carrying the load" is lower than 25/game.

 
Barry Sanders 5'-8" 203 - 3000 carrer carries.

Walter Payton 200 lbs

Forsett last year 5'-8" 195.

I can go on and on. Size is a bull#### excuse. What it is is terrible coaching and buying into some bull#### where someone else says these guys are too small. Then going along with it instead of saying bull####, my guy can handle it.....like ATL is doing.

Obviously lining up in a goalline formation and running with a 5-8" 205 guy is not going to work out well unless the OL can blow the DL off the LOS. It takes some creativity to use a smaller back correctly. Creativity is seriously lacking on a lot of NFL teams.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Barry Sanders 5'-8" 203 - 3000 carrer carries.

Walter Payton 200 lbs

Forsett last year 5'-8" 195.

I can go on and on. Size is a bull#### excuse. What it is is terrible coaching and buying into some bull#### where someone else says these guys are too small. Then going along with it instead of saying bull####, my guy can handle it.....like ATL is doing.

Obviously lining up in a goalline formation and running with a 5-8" 205 guy is not going to work out well unless the OL can blow the DL off the LOS. It takes some creativity to use a smaller back correctly. Creativity is seriously lacking on a lot of NFL teams.
How is it bad coaching? Bengals are 5-0. It obviously is better for them if hill comes online. Why give Gio 25 carries and run him into the ground if there is no need
 
Barry Sanders 5'-8" 203 - 3000 carrer carries.

Walter Payton 200 lbs

Forsett last year 5'-8" 195.

I can go on and on. Size is a bull#### excuse. What it is is terrible coaching and buying into some bull#### where someone else says these guys are too small. Then going along with it instead of saying bull####, my guy can handle it.....like ATL is doing.

Obviously lining up in a goalline formation and running with a 5-8" 205 guy is not going to work out well unless the OL can blow the DL off the LOS. It takes some creativity to use a smaller back correctly. Creativity is seriously lacking on a lot of NFL teams.
You bring up Payton and Sanders as guys that are roughly the same size as him. They played in a different era, guys weren't as big back than. I will give you Forsett, but some guys can't take the punishment. Maybe Gio is one of them.

 
Barry Sanders 5'-8" 203 - 3000 carrer carries.

Walter Payton 200 lbs

Forsett last year 5'-8" 195.

I can go on and on. Size is a bull#### excuse. What it is is terrible coaching and buying into some bull#### where someone else says these guys are too small. Then going along with it instead of saying bull####, my guy can handle it.....like ATL is doing.

Obviously lining up in a goalline formation and running with a 5-8" 205 guy is not going to work out well unless the OL can blow the DL off the LOS. It takes some creativity to use a smaller back correctly. Creativity is seriously lacking on a lot of NFL teams.
How is it bad coaching? Bengals are 5-0. It obviously is better for them if hill comes online. Why give Gio 25 carries and run him into the ground if there is no need
it's bad coaching when your FF player isn't getting enough run. NFL team win loss records are irrelevant.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bob Magaw said:
THREAD SKIP ALERT 3.0 (if not interested)

All of this is consistent with a serial blamer who reflexively demonizes others for doing the exact same things he does (there is no difference), with a persecution complex and inability to accept responsibility for his contributions and role in the miscommunication. It is exactly what I have come to expect. You are always right, and everybody else is always at fault. Same as it ever was. Got it.

Who would need or want help from somebody that already recused themselves from moralizing detail with the poor judgement to relay a misrepresented PM in the thread?
Magaw, I am no bf apologist, but you have been :own3d: in this thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
T with T said:
I don't understand how GIO can outperform this guy so badly and not get the starting gig. GIO has Devonta freeman potential if they unleash this guy and give him 20 carries/game and 4-6 catches...
I sense an angry Giorgio owner...
 
I have little choice, but I am starting Hill today on the hunch that the Bengals get up on the Bills and ride him. I had this same hunch with the Chiefs game, and while it is by no means guaranteed, again, I have little choice. If Hill doesn't get it going today, he's going to be riding the fantasy pine for a while.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top