Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

humpback

Members
  • Posts

    11,077
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by humpback

  1. And again on both. He clearly looks better than the other RBs for the 2nd week in a row as well.
  2. Don't they have 2 guys on pace for like 18 points in ppr? It's the #1 rushing team in the NFL, they can very easily support 2 guys (would have been Dobbins and Edwards).
  3. It would have been like a 45 yd. FG, which is essentially a gimme for Tucker, and if he thought throwing into triple coverage to his tiny WR was a "hole" they have bigger problems. It was a truly horrible decision.
  4. Yep, they were brutal, and I don't disagree with the premise, it's just not something that they have incorporated much (partly because Lamar isn't particularly good at it). I think they'd much prefer to run it down their throats, but we'll see whether that works. Like you said, all of their RBs are decent at catching the ball, so even if they do target them more as a group it would still be surprising if any one of them ended up with 5 catches. Not out of the realm of possibility, but not something I would predict.
  5. Lol whatever dude, keep thinking that Murray looks as good as he ever has and the Ravens have their RBs do completely different things than they actually do. It's almost like you're trying to be wrong, but you're entitled to your opinion.
  6. His range of outcomes is wide IMO, but 5 catches would be very surprising. The Ravens just don't utilize their RBs in the passing game much, combined they only averaged ~3 catches per game last year and no one had 5 in one game. I don't think so, but it's certainly possible.
  7. I tend to agree and don't pay much attention to them generally, although fumbles are never good. I only brought it up as a counter to the argument that he wasn't cut due to performance. Both Freeman and Murray had terrible preseason stats and Jones Jr. had good stats- Freeman and Murray were cut and Jones became the #2 RB. When the stats align with what people in the know have been seeing and reporting all preseason it probably isn't a complete coincidence.
  8. And yet the organization that has seen every rep decided that he was no longer good enough to be their #2 RB and took a dead cap hit in the next 2 years to let him go. And the writers who cover the team said he looked bad. Hmm, should I put more stock in an internet caveman or the Saints organization and their beat writers? You have a great rest of your weekend as well.
  9. Murray was terrible in the preseason- 10 carries for 12 yards and a fumble. Multiple reports said he was slow and his performance lackluster, and his week 1 performance wasn't much better. No offense, but he looked way worse than in his heyday- he used to run a sub 4.4 40, no way does he do so now. He's lost quite a bit, and it's pretty obvious the Saints saw that as well. You can call anything an opinion if you want to, but some are far more substantiated than others. You keep saying Williams was benched for missing a pass block. Sure, you're entitled to that opinion, but it's been pointed out to you over and over that the play happened on their last offensive play of the game, so I guess you would say that Lamar and their entire offense was benched as well. It's pretty silly. And your characterization of the Ravens running game is entirely inaccurate. They don't ask their RBs to pass block very often (see the evidence already presented), Williams has been praised for his pass blocking by his coaches and was the only RB who did so on Monday night, and they run the ball up the middle with their RBs FAR more often then they run it to the outside. These really aren't opinions, it's clear if you watch them play, but if you still aren't convinced I suppose you could chart the plays. Again, I've already admitted that there could be a plausible explanation for his performance and it could get better- maybe he's a bit out of shape, banged up, playing it safe, whatever. However, it's hard to believe anyone could watch him play in the preseason or in week 1 and think he's the same guy as he was. Not even close IMO. Anyway, this doesn't mean I think Williams is going to run away with the job or Murray is going to get cut. Time will tell how it all shakes out. I just think the arguments being made are way off base, so much so that I have to assume there's a lot of bias involved.
  10. Hill was going to be their 3rd down RB, Williams wasn't behind him. You said Murray wasn't cut due to performance- do you think the reason they asked him to take a pay cut was because he performed great? Of course not, they decided they'd rather take a cap hit to get rid of him and get nothing in return than to pay him a relatively modest salary. Logic dictates that they didn't like what they were seeing and had no plans to keep him in his role from previous seasons. Yes, time will tell. We have no idea what is going on behind the scenes or how this will play out, it just seems clear as day that you are looking at this through very biased lenses, hoping that you're proven "right" by trading him away. Some of your "arguments" are just plain false.
  11. Yep, on what might have been the slowest 8 yard TD run in history. IMO very high likelihood that Williams (and most RBs) would have scored on that play vs. very little chance Murray would have had scored on Williams'. Zero targets, zero pass blocks, zero long runs, a failed 4th and 1 attempt, and a 2.8 ypc on the night. Next to nothing.
  12. The reason he was 3rd (not 4th) on the depth chart was because he had 2 very good RBs in front of him. It wasn't because of his pass blocking, which I've already pointed that he's been praised for by the coaches and they Ravens don't have their RBs pass block very often at all- only 3 times in the entire game last week, and you guessed it, it was Williams doing the blocking all 3 times. You're also wrong about Murray IMO- he was cut for the combination of money AND performance. Since he had lost the #2 spot to an UDFA, they no longer wanted to pay their #3 guy much money so they sent him packing. IMO you're seeing what you want to see here- Murray is 31 years old (will be 32 in January), lost the #2 role and was cut in NO, then was signed by Baltimore along with 3 other RBs when their RB room got decimated by injuries. Since he was in a camp, it's entirely possible that they brought him in mainly because he was the most "ready" to play and they needed someone to play right away. Like I said earlier, it's possible he's slightly out of shape, or hesitant due to not knowing the playbook or something so maybe he'll improve, but he gave them next to nothing last week other than a "veteran presence". There's no way they're going to go through the season giving him meaningful carries if he keeps plodding like he did last week. Heck, the promotion of Freeman from the practice squad may say more about their feelings towards Murray than anything else.
  13. That's nice, but like I said, the Ravens typically run their RBs up the middle, which does require hitting the hole quickly. No idea why you seem to think they run primarily to the outside but they don't.
  14. Yes, you are confused. Lamar will sometimes take it to the outside when he keeps, but the RBs are usually running up the middle in the Ravens offense (see both rushing TDs last week). No one said anything about running into a pile (although Murray did lots of that last week), but of course running through a hole is kind of important for RBs in all systems, including the Ravens.
  15. You seem to be combining pass protection with running the RPO when they're really different things. The Ravens don't use their RBs to pass protect very much, and despite the not so great block attempt from Williams, he's generally seen as decent at it. He also spent a year on their practice squad, so you'd have to assume he worked on running the RPO. He did fine with it during the preseason, this may be more about lack of chemistry between he and Lamar since they didn't have any preseason game reps together. Williams has been praised by the coaches for his abilities including pass protecting so it's premature to write him off as unable. The Ravens, more than any other team IMO, need a RB with juice in order to run the RPO- you can't keep handing the ball off to a guy who can't squeeze through the hole quickly, and none of the current 3 have much/any juice left IMO.
  16. We're all speculating- obviously Williams didn't have a good game in terms of blocking or running the RPO, but we don't know if he's bad at it or just had an off couple of plays. I do know he did well in the preseason with it and was praised by the coaches though (could have just been coach-speak). We also aren't privy to how things are going in practice and the film room. I disagree about Murray- there's a chance he's just not in great shape and will get better, but he's far too slow right now to be the main back in this offense. You have to see the hole and hit it right away, and I just don't think he has the juice. For example, I think it's much more likely that Williams would have scored on Murray's TD than Murray would have scored on Williams'. Again, no idea if/how much Williams will improve on those things, but the Ravens are in big trouble if he can't. None of the other 3 are good fits for what they want to do IMO.
  17. I think Murray looked pretty terrible, and that TD wasn't very impressive at all IMO- slow and lumbering. This is all going to come down to Williams and his ability/inability to pick up the finer points of the game. I don't even think he's that good but the rest of the guys are washed IMO.
  18. Possible, although doesn't seem likely. They still have some cap space (and it's easy to add more), if they really liked him they would have found a way to make it work (especially considering his contract is very likely minimal). The reality is they weren't even remotely interested until they lost 2 RBs for the season, and they worked him out at the same time as 2 other terrible RBs. They also tried to claim Royce Freeman before even bringing Bell in for a look. Anyway, the point is that simply signing Bell doesn't necessarily mean they like him or more importantly plan on using him a lot. It doesn't move the needle for the other Baltimore RBs IMO, I don't think they are going to lose many touches to Bell and if they do, they very likely would have also lost them to Hill or whoever their #3 RB was anyway.
  19. Again, they HAD to add a RB, there was 0% chance they were going to play this season with only 2. I'd be a bit surprised if they didn't add another one as well. However, that doesn't necessarily mean they liked what they saw from Bell, it could just mean they disliked him less than Freeman and Holyfield. The available RB cupboard is pretty bare. If the Ravens liked Bell so much, why wouldn't they have pursued him sooner, before they lost 2 RBs for the season? Logic dictates that they liked Hill more than Bell since they weren't interested until he got hurt, so swapping those two shouldn't concern Williams owners IMO. Sure he'll likely get a few touches, but no reason to think it'll be more than Hill would have (or the average #3 RB).
  20. They had to sign somebody. Hard to imagine Bell eating into Williams' workload any more than Hill would have.
  21. You're the only one fishing here. Antonio Brown, Jamison Crowder, Wes Welker, Brandin Cooks, Cole Beasley, Desean Jackson, TY Hilton, etc. All NFL WRs are outliers, but while I'd prefer my WR's in the mold of Calvin Johnson, there are plenty of smaller WRs who have been successful as well.
  22. Now do it when it's actually apples to apples (when they were drafted): Rondale Moore- 5'7" 181 lbs Steve Smith- 5'9" 184 lbs Hines Ward- 5'11.6" 195 lbs Tyreek Hill- 5'8" 185 lbs Moore is 1 yr. younger than all of these guys were at the time as well.
  23. Not to mention, some people seem to think that catching COVID gives you bulletproof immunity. Even if everyone catching it is inevitable, would you rather play Russian roulette more or less often?
  24. He doesn't have to get all of the vacated goal line carries in order to get a boost. Cam and his 137 carries, 592 rushing yards, and 12 rushing TDs are gone- it's only logical that Harris gets a boost by his departure (same for Stevenson). How much remains to be seen.
  25. That was related to the topic of, you know, different QBs. You can have him, and he may be dirt cheap now (for a reason). At least that would make some sense, unlike if/when he was making a lot more money. Wouldn't put any weight on the "former MVP" thing, that was ages ago. He's ungood now, but if he's dirt cheap, probably an upgrade to Rush.
×
  • Create New...