Darren McFadden (1 Viewer)

[Garts]

I just made a big trade to get D-MAC in one of my leagues as I want to beat the curve and get him at a good price in case he blows up somewhat.

Reading some of the forums, some guys are really high on McFadden while others are worried about Michael Bush and Justin Fargas.

It sounds and looks like McFadden is healthy.

The truth is, D-Mac is the most talented RB on the roster, but he will be threatened by Bush at the goalline for sure. I'm just hoping McFadden can get in from 20 yards out before they get to Bush territory.

What is the feel on McFadden in terms of this year and beyond and what kind of numbers are we looking at??

It will be hard to keep their most talented/skilled guy off the field too much IMO, although Fargas and Bush are capable, they just don't brin gthe skills that D-Mac brings.

I can see McFadden apporaching 1000 yards on the ground and getting a pile of catches.

Great guy to have for ppr and yardage leagues.

I think he may surprise some to a point, he should be playing well because he was the 4th overall pick, but some of already written him off as a bust but I think he is line for a good year 2.

 

[mikel0254]

I think he'll be ok this year. Lots of people will steer clear of him b/c he busted last year and the unclear backfield picture. TC should show us what's in store, and I think you may have got him at the right time. I have a feeling he'll be climbing up the RB Rankings all offseason...just a hunch

 

[AllVolUT]

I'll be looking to grab McFadden in my leagues this year. It seems the post-rookie hype has begun and I feel as though most are sleeping on D-Mac. The Raiders have a very solid run blocking line, so with the current ADP of ~RB23, I think he presents great value.

Of course, this is all under the assumption that he progresses in pass blocking and has used this past off-season to get better acclimated to the playbook.

 

[FUBAR]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

 

[Garts]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

I guess what I meant was a speed guy who may not be the greatest ball carrier, but a guy who catches a pile of passes in the flats and makes things happen after the catch.Maybe not the same as Bush, but similar numbers in a way and the way they are used.

 

[Cripster]

I think he is going to be a much better runner than Bush. I really did not think he was a bust given the toe injury. He will share carries with one of the other two backs. However, how many teams are going to have 25+ touch guys anyway.

 

[mikel0254]

I think he is going to be a much better runner than Bush. I really did not think he was a bust given the toe injury. He will share carries with one of the other two backs. However, how many teams are going to have 25+ touch guys anyway.

I realize he had a toe injury, but I still think he busted last year. I'm not saying he IS A bust as a player (b/c I still think he will have a great career), but given his lofty expectations, high ADP, and the fact he played in 13 of 16 games (over 80%) and still didn't reach 500 years rushing (albeit 1 yard shy), I consider that a bust year

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.LaDanian Thomlinson 5'10" 221 - 31.7Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6Brian Westbrook 5'10" 203 - 29.1Steven Jackson 6'2" 231 - 29.7Clinton Portis 5'11" 223 - 31.1Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7" 212 - 33.2Marshawn Lynch 5'11" 215 - 30.0Frank Gore 5'9" 223 - 32.9Marion Barber III 6'0" 220 - 29.8Thomas Jones 5'10" 215 - 30.8Michael Turner 5'10" 237 - 34.0Willie Parker 5'10" 209 - 30.0LenDale White 6'1" 235 - 31.0Brandon Jacobs 6'4" 264 - 32.1Larry Johnson 6'1" 230 - 30.3Jamal Lewis 5'11" 245 - 34.2Matt Forte 6'1" 222 - 29.3Jonathan Stewart 5'11" 234 - 32.6Willis McGahee 6'0" 232 - 31.5Steve Slaton 5'9" 201 - 29.7An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

 

[akaoni]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.LaDanian Thomlinson 5'10" 221 - 31.7Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6Brian Westbrook 5'10" 203 - 29.1Steven Jackson 6'2" 231 - 29.7Clinton Portis 5'11" 223 - 31.1Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7" 212 - 33.2Marshawn Lynch 5'11" 215 - 30.0Frank Gore 5'9" 223 - 32.9Marion Barber III 6'0" 220 - 29.8Thomas Jones 5'10" 215 - 30.8Michael Turner 5'10" 237 - 34.0Willie Parker 5'10" 209 - 30.0LenDale White 6'1" 235 - 31.0Brandon Jacobs 6'4" 264 - 32.1Larry Johnson 6'1" 230 - 30.3Jamal Lewis 5'11" 245 - 34.2Matt Forte 6'1" 222 - 29.3Jonathan Stewart 5'11" 234 - 32.6Willis McGahee 6'0" 232 - 31.5Steve Slaton 5'9" 201 - 29.7An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Interesting, do you have a link for these stats?

 

[FUBAR]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8

You know, I've never thought of McFadden as the same style a runner as Bush, but his speed is the same and their size is as well. I guess the comparison is better than I thought, but I still think Bush is better in the open field and McFadden is more able to run between the tackles, although he isn't great there.

 

[Chadstroma]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8

You know, I've never thought of McFadden as the same style a runner as Bush, but his speed is the same and their size is as well. I guess the comparison is better than I thought, but I still think Bush is better in the open field and McFadden is more able to run between the tackles, although he isn't great there.

True, I dont think you look at them as having such a similar build because of their running styles being vastly different. McFadden is a real NFL RB that is able to run any run play you throw at him. Bush needs to be freed up and get space somehow, hence the use of him in the passing game. Once Bush gets that space, he is dangerous but he can not create that space for himself. He just dances way too much when behind blockers. You can do that in college and rely on your speed to make plays but in the NFL, the slowest guy on the field is usually pretty fast and you can not do that anymore.

 

[MAC_32]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203

Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211

BMI's nearly identical:

Bush - 27.5

McFadden - 27.8

You know, I've never thought of McFadden as the same style a runner as Bush, but his speed is the same and their size is as well. I guess the comparison is better than I thought, but I still think Bush is better in the open field and McFadden is more able to run between the tackles, although he isn't great there.

You're a greater believer in DMC between the tackles than I, been comparing him to Bush since before last season. I think their games are very similar, given how much Oakland should run the ball this season I think both him and Bush have a legit opportunity to be quality RB2's.

 

[FUBAR]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203

Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211

BMI's nearly identical:

Bush - 27.5

McFadden - 27.8

You know, I've never thought of McFadden as the same style a runner as Bush, but his speed is the same and their size is as well. I guess the comparison is better than I thought, but I still think Bush is better in the open field and McFadden is more able to run between the tackles, although he isn't great there.

True, I dont think you look at them as having such a similar build because of their running styles being vastly different. McFadden is a real NFL RB that is able to run any run play you throw at him. Bush needs to be freed up and get space somehow, hence the use of him in the passing game. Once Bush gets that space, he is dangerous but he can not create that space for himself. He just dances way too much when behind blockers. You can do that in college and rely on your speed to make plays but in the NFL, the slowest guy on the field is usually pretty fast and you can not do that anymore.

Bush always struck me as a guy who watched Barry Sanders too much as a kid and thinks he has the same talent. He lacks the vision.

 

[Chadstroma]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203

Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211

BMI's nearly identical:

Bush - 27.5

McFadden - 27.8

You know, I've never thought of McFadden as the same style a runner as Bush, but his speed is the same and their size is as well. I guess the comparison is better than I thought, but I still think Bush is better in the open field and McFadden is more able to run between the tackles, although he isn't great there.

True, I dont think you look at them as having such a similar build because of their running styles being vastly different. McFadden is a real NFL RB that is able to run any run play you throw at him. Bush needs to be freed up and get space somehow, hence the use of him in the passing game. Once Bush gets that space, he is dangerous but he can not create that space for himself. He just dances way too much when behind blockers. You can do that in college and rely on your speed to make plays but in the NFL, the slowest guy on the field is usually pretty fast and you can not do that anymore.

Bush always struck me as a guy who watched Barry Sanders too much as a kid and thinks he has the same talent. He lacks the vision.

I think it is more of just how he grew up. You know that every time he played football from being a lil tike that he could just juke people out of their shoes and take off with his speed and no one could catch him. All the way up to and during USC, that would have been the case. I think he just never developed the mentality and experience of looking for a small hole, hitting it hard and not hesitating- instead, he looks for the corner almost every time, tries to dance around defenders and hesitates. The speed of the NFL defender means that even though he is a fast guy, that speed is not as big of an advantage as it ever was in coming up. He no longer can just use that speed and beat them and he never developed the other skill sets to do so. So, to use him effectively, you need to get him out on screens, the flat or split him out. Give him some space to work with and allow his speed and agility to go in his favor. McFadden, on the other hand, is a much more complete runner. You saw this last year (well, thos of us that watched Raider games did) when healthy- he ran hard and fast. Taking the corner when presented but also very willing and able to run between the tackles as well, and with success.

 

[CalBear]

An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Here we go again...the whole idea of BMI as a selective property was thoroughly debunked last year. (Remember, the year that Mendenhall was going to do better than Forte and Chris Johnson because of his BMI). Among other things, the data sucks: the heights and weights listed on team sites are not reliable, and an athlete's weight can change by several pounds even over the course of a day or two, let alone over the course of a season.But even given that, the fact remains that you're looking at a population with a selection bias; most NFL RBs, successful or unsuccessful, have relatively high BMI. Most high-BMI guys bust, too, there are just more of them to begin with.

 

[twr]

I think he is going to be a much better runner than Bush. I really did not think he was a bust given the toe injury. He will share carries with one of the other two backs. However, how many teams are going to have 25+ touch guys anyway.

I realize he had a toe injury, but I still think he busted last year. I'm not saying he IS A bust as a player (b/c I still think he will have a great career), but given his lofty expectations, high ADP, and the fact he played in 13 of 16 games (over 80%) and still didn't reach 500 years rushing (albeit 1 yard shy), I consider that a bust year

when you have turf toe, its hard to walk, let alone RUN... that will really affect you... can you play through it like he did... yea but it hurts like hell.

 

[Gopher State]

Well the current FBG depth chart has Fargas as the starter

McFadden could be ok as a 4 or 5th FF RB, but Fargas could end up with better stats by seasons end

Buyer beware when you deal with Raider players

 

[mikel0254]

I think he is going to be a much better runner than Bush. I really did not think he was a bust given the toe injury. He will share carries with one of the other two backs. However, how many teams are going to have 25+ touch guys anyway.

I realize he had a toe injury, but I still think he busted last year. I'm not saying he IS A bust as a player (b/c I still think he will have a great career), but given his lofty expectations, high ADP, and the fact he played in 13 of 16 games (over 80%) and still didn't reach 500 years rushing (albeit 1 yard shy), I consider that a bust year

when you have turf toe, its hard to walk, let alone RUN... that will really affect you... can you play through it like he did... yea but it hurts like hell.

I won't disagree about the pain aspect, but you can play through it. LT got turf toe in week 1 - he played all 16 games, had over 1500 total yards, and scored 12 TD's. Not saying DMac is LT, but judging from LT, you can obviously play though it (and play pretty well) so I still think I call 2008 a bust from what everyone was expecting

 

[Chase Stuart]

An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Here we go again...the whole idea of BMI as a selective property was thoroughly debunked last year. (Remember, the year that Mendenhall was going to do better than Forte and Chris Johnson because of his BMI). Among other things, the data sucks: the heights and weights listed on team sites are not reliable, and an athlete's weight can change by several pounds even over the course of a day or two, let alone over the course of a season.But even given that, the fact remains that you're looking at a population with a selection bias; most NFL RBs, successful or unsuccessful, have relatively high BMI. Most high-BMI guys bust, too, there are just more of them to begin with.

It's hard to think of better evidence that, on average, a high BMI is a plus for running backs and a low BMI is a minus.

 

[todisco1]

I think he is going to be a much better runner than Bush. I really did not think he was a bust given the toe injury. He will share carries with one of the other two backs. However, how many teams are going to have 25+ touch guys anyway.

I realize he had a toe injury, but I still think he busted last year. I'm not saying he IS A bust as a player (b/c I still think he will have a great career), but given his lofty expectations, high ADP, and the fact he played in 13 of 16 games (over 80%) and still didn't reach 500 years rushing (albeit 1 yard shy), I consider that a bust year

when you have turf toe, its hard to walk, let alone RUN... that will really affect you... can you play through it like he did... yea but it hurts like hell.

I won't disagree about the pain aspect, but you can play through it. LT got turf toe in week 1 - he played all 16 games, had over 1500 total yards, and scored 12 TD's. Not saying DMac is LT, but judging from LT, you can obviously play though it (and play pretty well) so I still think I call 2008 a bust from what everyone was expecting

There are degrees of turf toe. Some you can play through, some you can't. Turf toe has ended careers - if it's severe there is no way you can play through it. I have no idea what McFadden's case was like, but it's tough to compare it it to LT because we have no idea if LT's was a much milder case or not.

 

[mikel0254]

I think he is going to be a much better runner than Bush. I really did not think he was a bust given the toe injury. He will share carries with one of the other two backs. However, how many teams are going to have 25+ touch guys anyway.

I realize he had a toe injury, but I still think he busted last year. I'm not saying he IS A bust as a player (b/c I still think he will have a great career), but given his lofty expectations, high ADP, and the fact he played in 13 of 16 games (over 80%) and still didn't reach 500 years rushing (albeit 1 yard shy), I consider that a bust year

when you have turf toe, its hard to walk, let alone RUN... that will really affect you... can you play through it like he did... yea but it hurts like hell.

I won't disagree about the pain aspect, but you can play through it. LT got turf toe in week 1 - he played all 16 games, had over 1500 total yards, and scored 12 TD's. Not saying DMac is LT, but judging from LT, you can obviously play though it (and play pretty well) so I still think I call 2008 a bust from what everyone was expecting

There are degrees of turf toe. Some you can play through, some you can't. Turf toe has ended careers - if it's severe there is no way you can play through it. I have no idea what McFadden's case was like, but it's tough to compare it it to LT because we have no idea if LT's was a much milder case or not.

I'm no doctor, and have no idea the severity of either DMac's or LT's toe, BUT if I had to say, they were of the same severity (or close to). Why? B/C neither were severe enough to keep them out an extended amount of time, and both were able to play through the pain to some extent. Both also said the toe was healing around November or December if I'm remembering right which leads me to believe they were close to the same severity.On one hand, LT played through it and played OK for his standards. The funny part is, LT had a VERY similar season to Forte, yet everyone is drooling over Forte and people are saying LT could be washed up... If turf toe plays that big of a role, then people should be pointing that out when comparing LT to the rest of the RB's out there

On the other hand, DMac played through it and didn't do much. I still think he's a good player and he'll have a good year this year, but he worries me about playing though injuries.

 

[Avery]

There are degrees of turf toe. Some you can play through, some you can't. Turf toe has ended careers - if it's severe there is no way you can play through it.

I have no idea what McFadden's case was like, but it's tough to compare it it to LT because we have no idea if LT's was a much milder case or not.

I'm no doctor, and have no idea the severity of either DMac's or LT's toe, BUT if I had to say, they were of the same severity (or close to). Why? B/C neither were severe enough to keep them out an extended amount of time, and both were able to play through the pain to some extent. Both also said the toe was healing around November or December if I'm remembering right which leads me to believe they were close to the same severity.On one hand, LT played through it and played OK for his standards. The funny part is, LT had a VERY similar season to Forte, yet everyone is drooling over Forte and people are saying LT could be washed up... If turf toe plays that big of a role, then people should be pointing that out when comparing LT to the rest of the RB's out there

On the other hand, DMac played through it and didn't do much. I still think he's a good player and he'll have a good year this year, but he worries me about playing though injuries.

Can't say I'm much of a fan of this reach in logic.

 

[ninerfanatic492000]

i would think Reggie's BMI is higher b/c i have no faith that he's anywhere near 6". Mcfadden has to be more than 1inch taller

 

[Burning Sensation]

i would think Reggie's BMI is higher b/c i have no faith that he's anywhere near 6". Mcfadden has to be more than 1inch taller

Mcfadden does have more children, so this could be true.

 

[cmv5]

when you have turf toe, its hard to walk, let alone RUN... that will really affect you... can you play through it like he did... yea but it hurts like hell.I won't disagree about the pain aspect, but you can play through it. LT got turf toe in week 1 - he played all 16 games, had over 1500 total yards, and scored 12 TD's. Not saying DMac is LT, but judging from LT, you can obviously play though it (and play pretty well) so I still think I call 2008 a bust from what everyone was expectingThere are degrees of turf toe. Some you can play through, some you can't. Turf toe has ended careers - if it's severe there is no way you can play through it. I have no idea what McFadden's case was like, but it's tough to compare it it to LT because we have no idea if LT's was a much milder case or not.I'm no doctor, and have no idea the severity of either DMac's or LT's toe, BUT if I had to say, they were of the same severity (or close to). Why? B/C neither were severe enough to keep them out an extended amount of time, and both were able to play through the pain to some extent. Both also said the toe was healing around November or December if I'm remembering right which leads me to believe they were close to the same severity.On one hand, LT played through it and played OK for his standards. The funny part is, LT had a VERY similar season to Forte, yet everyone is drooling over Forte and people are saying LT could be washed up... If turf toe plays that big of a role, then people should be pointing that out when comparing LT to the rest of the RB's out thereOn the other hand, DMac played through it and didn't do much. I still think he's a good player and he'll have a good year this year, but he worries me about playing though injuries.

As someone who has had his more than fair share of running backs with turf toe, I must say the most frustrating aspect of this type of injury is that the players always try to play through it. I can't at this very moment give you the best examples (I do seem to recall Lamont Jordan having it linger one season when he was with the Raiders and Tatum Bell having it) but they play with an injury that hurts like heck, and hinders their play but they are well enough to stay on the field. I know the pain remains and I believe giving the injury rest is the only cure. I could see this holding McFadden back quite a bit. Also, I don't think it is fair to compare two different players injuries. There is no baseline to compare the two with. I personally think that McFadden will have a great season and people will regret taking a wait and see approach with a guy with this kind of talent.

 

[Mr. Peterson]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.LaDanian Thomlinson 5'10" 221 - 31.7Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6Brian Westbrook 5'10" 203 - 29.1Steven Jackson 6'2" 231 - 29.7Clinton Portis 5'11" 223 - 31.1Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7" 212 - 33.2Marshawn Lynch 5'11" 215 - 30.0Frank Gore 5'9" 223 - 32.9Marion Barber III 6'0" 220 - 29.8Thomas Jones 5'10" 215 - 30.8Michael Turner 5'10" 237 - 34.0Willie Parker 5'10" 209 - 30.0LenDale White 6'1" 235 - 31.0Brandon Jacobs 6'4" 264 - 32.1Larry Johnson 6'1" 230 - 30.3Jamal Lewis 5'11" 245 - 34.2Matt Forte 6'1" 222 - 29.3Jonathan Stewart 5'11" 234 - 32.6Willis McGahee 6'0" 232 - 31.5Steve Slaton 5'9" 201 - 29.7An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

 

[Tanner9919]

I think he is going to be a much better runner than Bush. I really did not think he was a bust given the toe injury. He will share carries with one of the other two backs. However, how many teams are going to have 25+ touch guys anyway.

I realize he had a toe injury two toe injuries, one on each foot, but I still think he busted last year. I'm not saying he IS A bust as a player (b/c I still think he will have a great career), but given his lofty expectations, high ADP, and the fact he played in 13 of 16 games (over 80%) and still didn't reach 500 years rushing (albeit 1 yard shy), I consider that a bust year

Fixed.

taking away his huge game against KC when he rushed for 164 yards and 7.8 yards per att, he averaged just 3.6 yards per carry during the 2008 season..in only four games did he avg over 4 yards per carry, in games against KC(21-164), Jets ( 8-39), Denver (9-46), Miami ( 3-13).

has a habit of getting dinged up..first game of the season, had a 'stinger' in his arm and never returned to the ball game. then the toe injury.then the other toe. so far, he's Chris Brown, v2.0

 

[Chase Stuart]

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

I'm not sure what you mean by "work", but I think the evidence suggests that a good BMI is correlated with success.Do you think height means nothing for QBs? I sort of view the two the same way. But maybe I don't understand what you mean when you say it doesn't "work". I think BMI is pretty meaningless for younger players when you know their draft position, and it's obviously meaningless for older players who had a long history of production. So I wouldn't rely on BMI for very much, but only because I would rely on those other tools instead.

 

[Mr. Peterson]

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

I'm not sure what you mean by "work", but I think the evidence suggests that a good BMI is correlated with success.Do you think height means nothing for QBs? I sort of view the two the same way. But maybe I don't understand what you mean when you say it doesn't "work". I think BMI is pretty meaningless for younger players when you know their draft position, and it's obviously meaningless for older players who had a long history of production. So I wouldn't rely on BMI for very much, but only because I would rely on those other tools instead.

BMI in general does not work. You are not taking so many different factors into consideration if you use just the BMI. You can have two complete different body types with the exact same BMI. You can have two guys who are 6' tall and weigh 200lbs. One guy could be in great shape and ripped and the other one could be fat and lazy. Now I know most NFL athletes and considered to be in great shape so you don't run into that argument too often, but it still doesn't work becuae of body types. You can have an athlete who is top heavy and have no lower body strength, or just the opposite and be all legs and no upper body strength. But if that person is 6' and 200lbs then his BMI will say the same thing. Let's take RB's for an example because we are talking about them here. You get a RB like Norwood who looks like a WR but might have the same BMI as another RB that has the typical RB body type. Then you have someone like MJD, who according to the numbers up above has a 33.2 BMI (and MJD is not 5'7" which means his BMI is actually higher). For starters, if you look up his BMI on the official chart it will say that MJD is obese. Not overweight, but obese. I don't know how you can even use BMI when it says things like that. That alone should debunk the whole BMI theory that some people on here use. I know you can use BMI as a small form of body assesment, but you can't use it as your only determining factor. I think alot of people on here don't understand what BMI really is and that it doesn't mean anything.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

I'm not sure what you mean by "work", but I think the evidence suggests that a good BMI is correlated with success.Do you think height means nothing for QBs? I sort of view the two the same way. But maybe I don't understand what you mean when you say it doesn't "work". I think BMI is pretty meaningless for younger players when you know their draft position, and it's obviously meaningless for older players who had a long history of production. So I wouldn't rely on BMI for very much, but only because I would rely on those other tools instead.

BMI in general does not work. You are not taking so many different factors into consideration if you use just the BMI. You can have two complete different body types with the exact same BMI. You can have two guys who are 6' tall and weigh 200lbs. One guy could be in great shape and ripped and the other one could be fat and lazy. Now I know most NFL athletes and considered to be in great shape so you don't run into that argument too often, but it still doesn't work becuae of body types. You can have an athlete who is top heavy and have no lower body strength, or just the opposite and be all legs and no upper body strength. But if that person is 6' and 200lbs then his BMI will say the same thing. Let's take RB's for an example because we are talking about them here. You get a RB like Norwood who looks like a WR but might have the same BMI as another RB that has the typical RB body type. Then you have someone like MJD, who according to the numbers up above has a 33.2 BMI (and MJD is not 5'7" which means his BMI is actually higher). For starters, if you look up his BMI on the official chart it will say that MJD is obese. Not overweight, but obese. I don't know how you can even use BMI when it says things like that. That alone should debunk the whole BMI theory that some people on here use. I know you can use BMI as a small form of body assesment, but you can't use it as your only determining factor. I think alot of people on here don't understand what BMI really is and that it doesn't mean anything.

I don't care what the BMI chart says. I understand that muscle weighs more than fat and the BMI chart ignores muscle mass. But who cares? In practice, a good BMI is correlated with production.I don't know a single person who uses BMI as their only determining factor. Do you disagree that, on average, a RB with a BMI of 30 will be better than one with a BMI of 35 or one with a BMI of 26?

 

[CalBear]

Do you disagree that, on average, a RB with a BMI of 30 will be better than one with a BMI of 35 or one with a BMI of 26?

Yes.

 

[Mr. Peterson]

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

I'm not sure what you mean by "work", but I think the evidence suggests that a good BMI is correlated with success.Do you think height means nothing for QBs? I sort of view the two the same way. But maybe I don't understand what you mean when you say it doesn't "work". I think BMI is pretty meaningless for younger players when you know their draft position, and it's obviously meaningless for older players who had a long history of production. So I wouldn't rely on BMI for very much, but only because I would rely on those other tools instead.

BMI in general does not work. You are not taking so many different factors into consideration if you use just the BMI. You can have two complete different body types with the exact same BMI. You can have two guys who are 6' tall and weigh 200lbs. One guy could be in great shape and ripped and the other one could be fat and lazy. Now I know most NFL athletes and considered to be in great shape so you don't run into that argument too often, but it still doesn't work becuae of body types. You can have an athlete who is top heavy and have no lower body strength, or just the opposite and be all legs and no upper body strength. But if that person is 6' and 200lbs then his BMI will say the same thing. Let's take RB's for an example because we are talking about them here. You get a RB like Norwood who looks like a WR but might have the same BMI as another RB that has the typical RB body type. Then you have someone like MJD, who according to the numbers up above has a 33.2 BMI (and MJD is not 5'7" which means his BMI is actually higher). For starters, if you look up his BMI on the official chart it will say that MJD is obese. Not overweight, but obese. I don't know how you can even use BMI when it says things like that. That alone should debunk the whole BMI theory that some people on here use. I know you can use BMI as a small form of body assesment, but you can't use it as your only determining factor. I think alot of people on here don't understand what BMI really is and that it doesn't mean anything.

I don't care what the BMI chart says. I understand that muscle weighs more than fat and the BMI chart ignores muscle mass. But who cares? In practice, a good BMI is correlated with production.I don't know a single person who uses BMI as their only determining factor. Do you disagree that, on average, a RB with a BMI of 30 will be better than one with a BMI of 35 or one with a BMI of 26?

From what other peoples research shows, sure. That seems to be about the average size of a succesful RB in the NFL. And I know quite a few people who use BMI as their only determining factor. Not saying you or EBF are one of them, but how well did EBF's BMI arguments take him in other threads or arguments about a players sucess just because of his BMI. It's just the hieght and weight that you are talking about. Not a formula, just thier measurements. Are you willing to say a player is going to be good or not purely based on how much they weight or how tall they are?

 

[weasel3515]

What about Fargas? Where does he fit into the picture? His ypc was lower than both DMC's and Bush's at 3.9 compared to 4.4 for the other two. I also think he is probably the worst receiver of the three. Anyone else see a three-headed RBBC? Oakland was 10th in the league in running the ball (which is pretty amazing considering most weren't scared of the Raiders' passing game. They could be better this year if Russell improves and a wideout emerges but if it's a RBBC I don't think anyone of them will be worth more than a backup fantasy RB or RB3 at best.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.LaDanian Thomlinson 5'10" 221 - 31.7Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6Brian Westbrook 5'10" 203 - 29.1Steven Jackson 6'2" 231 - 29.7Clinton Portis 5'11" 223 - 31.1Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7" 212 - 33.2Marshawn Lynch 5'11" 215 - 30.0Frank Gore 5'9" 223 - 32.9Marion Barber III 6'0" 220 - 29.8Thomas Jones 5'10" 215 - 30.8Michael Turner 5'10" 237 - 34.0Willie Parker 5'10" 209 - 30.0LenDale White 6'1" 235 - 31.0Brandon Jacobs 6'4" 264 - 32.1Larry Johnson 6'1" 230 - 30.3Jamal Lewis 5'11" 245 - 34.2Matt Forte 6'1" 222 - 29.3Jonathan Stewart 5'11" 234 - 32.6Willis McGahee 6'0" 232 - 31.5Steve Slaton 5'9" 201 - 29.7An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

Excuse me. Are you in charge of what is or what isn't a relevant topic of discussion? If so I had not seen where we had to bow down and kiss your ring before we can post about things that we have studied and thought about much longer than the little time that you took to post a response. You didn't bother to read the summary that I clearly post at the end where I state that an unusually high or low BMI in a VACUM doen't mean anything. I acknowledged that in my post. Your response doesn't make any acknowledgement that I know more than what I shared. I didn't see where YOU had shared any knowledge that you know for a fact that what I drew as a conclusion is wrong. Considering your response to me I highly doubt that you have prescient knowledge of who will or won't succeed as a FF RB or that you know anytying that I would find useful to me. I looked over BMI information and drew MY OWN conclusions and I'll continue to do my own studying on any topic that I find relevant ,including BMI, and I'll make the decision to share or not without consulting you.

 

[RaiderBones]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.LaDanian Thomlinson 5'10" 221 - 31.7Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6Brian Westbrook 5'10" 203 - 29.1Steven Jackson 6'2" 231 - 29.7Clinton Portis 5'11" 223 - 31.1Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7" 212 - 33.2Marshawn Lynch 5'11" 215 - 30.0Frank Gore 5'9" 223 - 32.9Marion Barber III 6'0" 220 - 29.8Thomas Jones 5'10" 215 - 30.8Michael Turner 5'10" 237 - 34.0Willie Parker 5'10" 209 - 30.0LenDale White 6'1" 235 - 31.0Brandon Jacobs 6'4" 264 - 32.1Larry Johnson 6'1" 230 - 30.3Jamal Lewis 5'11" 245 - 34.2Matt Forte 6'1" 222 - 29.3Jonathan Stewart 5'11" 234 - 32.6Willis McGahee 6'0" 232 - 31.5Steve Slaton 5'9" 201 - 29.7An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

Excuse me. Are you in charge of what is or what isn't a relevant topic of discussion? If so I had not seen where we had to bow down and kiss your ring before we can post about things that we have studied and thought about much longer than the little time that you took to post a response. You didn't bother to read the summary that I clearly post at the end where I state that an unusually high or low BMI in a VACUM doen't mean anything. I acknowledged that in my post. Your response doesn't make any acknowledgement that I know more than what I shared. I didn't see where YOU had shared any knowledge that you know for a fact that what I drew as a conclusion is wrong. Considering your response to me I highly doubt that you have prescient knowledge of who will or won't succeed as a FF RB or that you know anytying that I would find useful to me. I looked over BMI information and drew MY OWN conclusions and I'll continue to do my own studying on any topic that I find relevant ,including BMI, and I'll make the decision to share or not without consulting you.

Can we please stay on topic for once. I know it's hard for some of you to do but try it just once. This topic is about McFadden not about BMI.

 

[weasel3515]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.LaDanian Thomlinson 5'10" 221 - 31.7Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6Brian Westbrook 5'10" 203 - 29.1Steven Jackson 6'2" 231 - 29.7Clinton Portis 5'11" 223 - 31.1Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7" 212 - 33.2Marshawn Lynch 5'11" 215 - 30.0Frank Gore 5'9" 223 - 32.9Marion Barber III 6'0" 220 - 29.8Thomas Jones 5'10" 215 - 30.8Michael Turner 5'10" 237 - 34.0Willie Parker 5'10" 209 - 30.0LenDale White 6'1" 235 - 31.0Brandon Jacobs 6'4" 264 - 32.1Larry Johnson 6'1" 230 - 30.3Jamal Lewis 5'11" 245 - 34.2Matt Forte 6'1" 222 - 29.3Jonathan Stewart 5'11" 234 - 32.6Willis McGahee 6'0" 232 - 31.5Steve Slaton 5'9" 201 - 29.7An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

Excuse me. Are you in charge of what is or what isn't a relevant topic of discussion? If so I had not seen where we had to bow down and kiss your ring before we can post about things that we have studied and thought about much longer than the little time that you took to post a response. You didn't bother to read the summary that I clearly post at the end where I state that an unusually high or low BMI in a VACUM doen't mean anything. I acknowledged that in my post. Your response doesn't make any acknowledgement that I know more than what I shared. I didn't see where YOU had shared any knowledge that you know for a fact that what I drew as a conclusion is wrong. Considering your response to me I highly doubt that you have prescient knowledge of who will or won't succeed as a FF RB or that you know anytying that I would find useful to me. I looked over BMI information and drew MY OWN conclusions and I'll continue to do my own studying on any topic that I find relevant ,including BMI, and I'll make the decision to share or not without consulting you.

Can we please stay on topic for once. I know it's hard for some of you to do but try it just once. This topic is about McFadden not about BMI.

I'm still wondering what people think about their backfield, not Bowel Movements International...

 

[Chadstroma]

I'm still wondering what people think about their backfield, not Bowel Movements International...

Assuming health of all involved, I expect McFadden to get nearly half of the carries with Fargas and Bush getting leftovers. Fargas is not one to stay healthy so if he gets hurt then I expect McFadden to get closer to 60% of carries with Bush getting a healthy increase in carries as well. As long as McFadden is healthy, he will be the clear go to guy but they will try to keep him fresh and healthy by using the capable legs of Fargas and Bush.

 

[bigmurd]

If I had McFadden I'd want to have Bush too - Fargas not so much. If you have Bush/ McFadden I like your chances.

 

[Max Power]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203

Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211

BMI's nearly identical:

Bush - 27.5

McFadden - 27.8

BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.

Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6

So you're saying McFadden is basically two pounds away from meeting this criteria? BMI is a fun stat, but that is about all it is

 

[HellToupee]

If I had McFadden I'd want to have Bush too - Fargas not so much. If you have Bush/ McFadden I like your chances.

While a big believer in McFadden and feel he's a huge bargain I do think its smart to hedge bets and handcuff McFadden/Bush

 

[H8fulHuck]

If I had McFadden I'd want to have Bush too - Fargas not so much. If you have Bush/ McFadden I like your chances.

While a big believer in McFadden and feel he's a huge bargain I do think its smart to hedge bets and handcuff McFadden/Bush

Well said. I think Bush will be the guy to target myself. Good potential if you can get him late.

 

[Mr. Peterson]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.LaDanian Thomlinson 5'10" 221 - 31.7Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6Brian Westbrook 5'10" 203 - 29.1Steven Jackson 6'2" 231 - 29.7Clinton Portis 5'11" 223 - 31.1Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7" 212 - 33.2Marshawn Lynch 5'11" 215 - 30.0Frank Gore 5'9" 223 - 32.9Marion Barber III 6'0" 220 - 29.8Thomas Jones 5'10" 215 - 30.8Michael Turner 5'10" 237 - 34.0Willie Parker 5'10" 209 - 30.0LenDale White 6'1" 235 - 31.0Brandon Jacobs 6'4" 264 - 32.1Larry Johnson 6'1" 230 - 30.3Jamal Lewis 5'11" 245 - 34.2Matt Forte 6'1" 222 - 29.3Jonathan Stewart 5'11" 234 - 32.6Willis McGahee 6'0" 232 - 31.5Steve Slaton 5'9" 201 - 29.7An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

Excuse me. Are you in charge of what is or what isn't a relevant topic of discussion? If so I had not seen where we had to bow down and kiss your ring before we can post about things that we have studied and thought about much longer than the little time that you took to post a response. You didn't bother to read the summary that I clearly post at the end where I state that an unusually high or low BMI in a VACUM doen't mean anything. I acknowledged that in my post. Your response doesn't make any acknowledgement that I know more than what I shared. I didn't see where YOU had shared any knowledge that you know for a fact that what I drew as a conclusion is wrong. Considering your response to me I highly doubt that you have prescient knowledge of who will or won't succeed as a FF RB or that you know anytying that I would find useful to me. I looked over BMI information and drew MY OWN conclusions and I'll continue to do my own studying on any topic that I find relevant ,including BMI, and I'll make the decision to share or not without consulting you.

Wow, I either really upset you or you are 12. I'm sorry either way (I'm just kidding, please dont get more angry...)And I understand what you guys are trying to say, but you don't need to think that you are using some form of a scientific formula. All I'm saying is that it seems some of you are tying to predict if a player is going to be successful or not based on thier height and weight. That's all BMI is. Height and weight. McFadden is skinny, but he is still only about 21, right? He has room to grow. And even if he doesn't I think he will be fine as a runner in the NFL. The only reason I would like to see him add a couple pounds for is to help prevent any form of injury in the future.

 

[cmv5]

I like McFadden, but in what way is he "Reggie Bush West"? They aren't that similar.

Their builds are somewhat similiar:Reggie Bush - 6'0" 203Darren McFadden - 6'1" 211BMI's nearly identical:Bush - 27.5McFadden - 27.8BMI's down below 28 are very rare for top NFL RBs.LaDanian Thomlinson 5'10" 221 - 31.7Adrian Peterson 6'1" 217 - 28.6Brian Westbrook 5'10" 203 - 29.1Steven Jackson 6'2" 231 - 29.7Clinton Portis 5'11" 223 - 31.1Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7" 212 - 33.2Marshawn Lynch 5'11" 215 - 30.0Frank Gore 5'9" 223 - 32.9Marion Barber III 6'0" 220 - 29.8Thomas Jones 5'10" 215 - 30.8Michael Turner 5'10" 237 - 34.0Willie Parker 5'10" 209 - 30.0LenDale White 6'1" 235 - 31.0Brandon Jacobs 6'4" 264 - 32.1Larry Johnson 6'1" 230 - 30.3Jamal Lewis 5'11" 245 - 34.2Matt Forte 6'1" 222 - 29.3Jonathan Stewart 5'11" 234 - 32.6Willis McGahee 6'0" 232 - 31.5Steve Slaton 5'9" 201 - 29.7An unusually low or unusually high BMI doesn't mean much in a vacum but it appears that shorter guys with high BMI's who have tended to succeed were not hampered but helped by higher BMI's. And the big guys, like Jacobs, were more in proportion with their BMI's due to their height. Small and quick (make that very quick) guys with low BMIs seem to be able to make a niche but if they are tall with low BMI's I haven't found a lot of evidence for that sort of success, their are some but not a lot of them.

Let's please stop with the BMI. It means nothing and the whole formula is a joke. BMI does not work.

Excuse me. Are you in charge of what is or what isn't a relevant topic of discussion? If so I had not seen where we had to bow down and kiss your ring before we can post about things that we have studied and thought about much longer than the little time that you took to post a response. You didn't bother to read the summary that I clearly post at the end where I state that an unusually high or low BMI in a VACUM doen't mean anything. I acknowledged that in my post. Your response doesn't make any acknowledgement that I know more than what I shared. I didn't see where YOU had shared any knowledge that you know for a fact that what I drew as a conclusion is wrong. Considering your response to me I highly doubt that you have prescient knowledge of who will or won't succeed as a FF RB or that you know anytying that I would find useful to me. I looked over BMI information and drew MY OWN conclusions and I'll continue to do my own studying on any topic that I find relevant ,including BMI, and I'll make the decision to share or not without consulting you.

Wow, I either really upset you or you are 12. I'm sorry either way (I'm just kidding, please dont get more angry...)And I understand what you guys are trying to say, but you don't need to think that you are using some form of a scientific formula. All I'm saying is that it seems some of you are tying to predict if a player is going to be successful or not based on thier height and weight. That's all BMI is. Height and weight. McFadden is skinny, but he is still only about 21, right? He has room to grow. And even if he doesn't I think he will be fine as a runner in the NFL. The only reason I would like to see him add a couple pounds for is to help prevent any form of injury in the future.

I agree to a point. I think BMI is one more thing, along with things like 40 time and college success to help to predict if a running back has what it takes to have success in the NFL. I find it weird people are comfortable with prediciting failure for McFadden based on BMI when Chris Johnson and Peterson are a case of Montezuma's revenge away from having the same BMI. When a player is bothered by turf toe all season, you pretty much call the season a wash. Clearly, it was an injury that bothered him enough to resort to wearing steel plates in his shoes to prevent this injury from occurring again. If you felt that McFadden was an injury waiting to happen and he got double turf toe and a banged-up shoulder then I can understand you feeling like last season reinforced that idea. I personally liked what I saw of him in college and I think he can be special. It seems to me people are too quick to write players off due to these types of injuries. These type of injuries are annoying because we see the player on the field but it robs them of that extra gear. Look at the rookie seasons of Larry Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson (this is in no way suggesting McFadden will have the kind of success they had in their second season but...), Larry struggled with an ankle injury that bothered him all season his rookie year and Calvin dealt with the back issues. You'd be hard pressed to find people who will admit that they were skeptical of Calvin in his sophomore season now, but the reality was for every Calvin lover on this board there were three that had Santonio Holmes ahead of him.

 

[puckalicious]

I agree to a point. I think BMI is one more thing, along with things like 40 time and college success to help to predict if a running back has what it takes to have success in the NFL. I find it weird people are comfortable with prediciting failure for McFadden based on BMI when Chris Johnson and Peterson are a case of Montezuma's revenge away from having the same BMI.

When a player is bothered by turf toe all season, you pretty much call the season a wash. Clearly, it was an injury that bothered him enough to resort to wearing steel plates in his shoes to prevent this injury from occurring again. If you felt that McFadden was an injury waiting to happen and he got double turf toe and a banged-up shoulder then I can understand you feeling like last season reinforced that idea. I personally liked what I saw of him in college and I think he can be special.

It seems to me people are too quick to write players off due to these types of injuries. These type of injuries are annoying because we see the player on the field but it robs them of that extra gear. Look at the rookie seasons of Larry Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson (this is in no way suggesting McFadden will have the kind of success they had in their second season but...), Larry struggled with an ankle injury that bothered him all season his rookie year and Calvin dealt with the back issues. You'd be hard pressed to find people who will admit that they were skeptical of Calvin in his sophomore season now, but the reality was for every Calvin lover on this board there were three that had Santonio Holmes ahead of him.

Those guys obviously never watched either one play. There was a guy in my league who thought this too, he finished in last place.I haven't watched DMF to have an opinion - assuming he has the opportunity and is not limited by injury this year, is he talented enough to make a difference? Put aside all the talk about his legs being too skinny, or his BMI is too low, or this and that. Does the guy have the level of talent it takes to succeed when given the opportunity? Based on his draft position (I know this is no guarantee of success) I'm inclined to think he'll do well. I just don't have any idea what to project for him this year. The possibility of RBBC with Bush and Fargas is a concern to some degree.