Kevan Barlow (1 Viewer)

[chinawildman]

I don't have any numbers in front of me, but.....The last time the Niners had a huge rushing year, wasn't it Garcia's first year, when the entire passing O was in the Toliet? Isn't that a similar setup to this season?

Yes. In 1999 SF lost a probowl guard in kevin gogan, lost steve young in week 3, and owens and rice both severely underperformed (failed to break 1000 yds). It was also Charlie Garner's first year in SF.Niners were the #1 rushing team in the NFL that season.EDITED TO ADD: For all those that think barlow won't do anything because SF will be "playing catchup the entire time"... The 1999 niners were last in total defense, they started 2 rookies at CB that season (plummer, webster)

 

[Irish]

The only difference between Tomlinson and Barlow is that LaDanian has proved to be more durable, eh? Do you realize how ridiculous this sounds? Seriously, YOU'RE the reason why I win in a lot of my leagues. It's not my close mindedness, but the fact that I live in reality.

We obviously are looking at things based on different scoring. None of my leagues awards pts for receptions to rbs. Don't believe in awarding pts for a rb catching a pass for 1 yd or sometimes losing yards. We do award rbs for rec yds, just not actual catches. I LOL at guys like you who claim that players such as Tomlinson won leagues for ya. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to draft players of Tomlinson's value in the 1st rd, league titles are won later in the draft. Tomlinson had a great yr last yr, better than Barlow's, but their stats from last yr are gonna get you zero pts for this yr. I said Barlow is close in comparable running back talent. Barlow proved that at the end of the yr. What did Tomlinson have last yr that Barlow didn't? Opportunities. Barlow will get his share of opportunities this yr, but only if he can stay healthy. That has been the knock so far on Barlow, not his talent. IF Barlow can stay healthy then he is a top 10 rb automatic. I base my drafts on the value on players for the coming season, not purely on what they did last season. By the way in none of my leagues has the Tomlinson owner won anything.

 

[Burning Sensation]

We obviously are looking at things based on different scoring. None of my leagues awards pts for receptions to rbs. Don't believe in awarding pts for a rb catching a pass for 1 yd or sometimes losing yards. We do award rbs for rec yds, just not actual catches. I LOL at guys like you who claim that players such as Tomlinson won leagues for ya. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to draft players of Tomlinson's value in the 1st rd, league titles are won later in the draft. Tomlinson had a great yr last yr, better than Barlow's, but their stats from last yr are gonna get you zero pts for this yr. I said Barlow is close in comparable running back talent. Barlow proved that at the end of the yr. What did Tomlinson have last yr that Barlow didn't? Opportunities. Barlow will get his share of opportunities this yr, but only if he can stay healthy. That has been the knock so far on Barlow, not his talent. IF Barlow can stay healthy then he is a top 10 rb automatic. I base my drafts on the value on players for the coming season, not purely on what they did last season. By the way in none of my leagues has the Tomlinson owner won anything.

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: This is one of those things where i actually feel stupider after reading it.

 

[Loco Barlow]

Barlow will be loco on the field next year.

 

[switz]

Strange that now that Hearst is gone, Barlow is still one of the most hotly debated players on this board... Barlow could be running behind the KC line and have Peyton Manning throwing to him and there will still be people that refuse to touch him with a 10 foot pole.

I don't know about that. In fact I think the reason there is a big question NOW is because his team is in shambles, compared to the previous theree years. SF RBs have always done well, but this yearisn't going to be the same system (from what I've heard), they've lost their high octane offense, and Barlow isn't that durable (from a historical perspective).As everyone has said again and again, it's much about opportunity and system. Same reason people are downgrading Portis despite WAS having a good OL, and a good OL coach. System. Opportunity. Those things changedthis year for Barlow.IMO, he's a fringe top-10 RB. Corey Dillon-esque IMO, could be #8, could be #23

 

[switz]

Tomlinson had a great yr last yr, better than Barlow's, but their stats from last yr are gonna get you zero pts for this yr. I said Barlow is close in comparable running back talent. Barlow proved that at the end of the yr. What did Tomlinson have last yr that Barlow didn't? Opportunities. Barlow will get his share of opportunities this yr, but only if he can stay healthy. That has been the knock so far on Barlow, not his talent.

May I nominate this post for the FF Darwin Awards!

 

[Irish]

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: This is one of those things where i actually feel stupider after reading it.

I didn't think that was possible!

 

[switz]

I didn't think that was possible!

They say your association has a big impact on you. I guess if you read stupid things enough, you actually can get more stupid.

 

[RBM]

Holmes is another guy that I won't draft. His age and decreasing YPC worry me.

:iamsmilin:

 

[Irish]

I don't know about that. In fact I think the reason there is a big question NOW is because his team is in shambles, compared to the previous theree years. SF RBs have always done well, but this yearisn't going to be the same system (from what I've heard), they've lost their high octane offense, and Barlow isn't that durable (from a historical perspective).As everyone has said again and again, it's much about opportunity and system. Same reason people are downgrading Portis despite WAS having a good OL, and a good OL coach. System. Opportunity. Those things changedthis year for Barlow.IMO, he's a fringe top-10 RB. Corey Dillon-esque IMO, could be #8, could be #23

BLah blah blah yada yada yada....we all know you think Sf is gonna fall off the face of the nfl map after releasing the greatest rb to ever play the game.

 

[Irish]

They say your association has a big impact on you. I guess if you read stupid things enough, you actually can get more stupid.

That is why I try not to read too many of your posts.

 

[switz]

That is why I try not to read too many of your posts.

It's pretty obvious you don't readthem by your replies, either that or you failed reading comprehension.

 

[Irish]

It's pretty obvious you don't readthem by your replies, either that or you failed reading comprehension.

What is the point of reading your posts? THey all say same thing over and over.......Garrison Hearst is the greatest rb whovever played the game and Barlow stinks.

 

[jurb26]

Just stop right there. I'm not listening to your opinions anymore.

I don't know how you can say that and say that your not closed minded. There have been plenty of RBs to come out of the shadows and prove their tallent. What about Holmes just a few years ago. Never started in college and back-up in Balt. Guess he has no tallent or very little? Barry Sanders couldn't crack the line-up at OSU for a few years due to Thomas. We know who the more tallented player is now though. What about D.Davis? Nobody would have ever thought he had the tallent to produce like he has in the the league so far. While I agree it is highly unlikely that Barlow is as good/productive as (won't use tallented cause its too subjective) as LT. It is very flatheaded to say it is not possible though. It is also close-minded to stop reading someones entire arguement, but then bashing them for their view.

 

[ajay]

Yes. In 1999 SF lost a probowl guard in kevin gogan, lost steve young in week 3, and owens and rice both severely underperformed (failed to break 1000 yds). It was also Charlie Garner's first year in SF.Niners were the #1 rushing team in the NFL that season.EDITED TO ADD: For all those that think barlow won't do anything because SF will be "playing catchup the entire time"... The 1999 niners were last in total defense, they started 2 rookies at CB that season (plummer, webster)

good pts but to put things in perspective '99 may not seem that long ago but is ages in nfl/niner terms.it's a whole new team/coaching staff, so aside from the team still being called the 49ers, much has changed so you can't just automatically expect same result.

 

[Drugrunner]

IMO, he's a fringe top-10 RB. Corey Dillon-esque IMO, could be #8, could be #23

IMO this statement is a dead on assessment of my thoughts.Like Dillon for years, I absolutely want Barlow on my team for the chance at the big payoff, I'm just not willing to pay the current mainstream Market Value for him.

 

[ajay]

I've used the same argument in other threads, and I am not a huge Barlow fan either.  HOWEVER . . .If Barlow gets 300 carries (a big if, I know) AND 50 receptions (which is not that unreasonable), I don't think Top 10 is being unreasonable.  Top 20 would be a VIRTUAL LOCK.Here's how RB with 300+ carries did in the last 5 years and their fantasy rankings:200313 RB.  1-4, 6-12, 18, 2220029 RB.  1-3, 6-8, 10, 12, 16200110 RB.  2-8, 10, 14, 1920009 RB.  2-3, 10-12, 14, 16-17, 1919996 RB.  1, 3, 5, 8-10Considering Barlow had over 200 carries and 35 receptions in split duty and was only a regular starter at the end of the season, I don't think it is a stretch for him to get 300 carries.  In his 4 starts, he had 80 carries, so that would put him at 320 carries if his carries were projected out for starting all 16 games.

that's good stuff anarchy.possible to list who those rb's were?be interesting to look at who the rb's actually were and their situations(team/offense/surrounding talent).i agree that with 300+carries(not to mention recs) he'd have a good chance to do well, as you say lock top 20, safe bet for top15.add that to the fact that what?2-4 of the top10rb's change each yr?thing is by time our real drafts come around, he'll be so hyped he'll go a bit earlier than i'd be willing to nab him.

 

[switz]

What is the point of reading your posts? THey all say same thing over and over.......Garrison Hearst is the greatest rb whovever played the game and Barlow stinks.

Yep - failed reading comprehension.Where oh where in this thread did I mention Hearst???? NOWHEREWhere did I say Barlow sucks? NOWHEREGo back to grade school reading comprehension my friend. All I did was post that the reason people are concerned NOW is because the team has changed drastically from last year.

 

[switz]

IMO this statement is a dead on assessment of my thoughts.Like Dillon for years, I absolutely want Barlow on my team for the chance at the big payoff, I'm just not willing to pay the current mainstream Market Value for him.

Thanks drugrunner!

 

[Irish]

Yep - failed reading comprehension.Where oh where in this thread did I mention Hearst???? NOWHEREWhere did I say Barlow sucks? NOWHEREGo back to grade school reading comprehension my friend. All I did was post that the reason people are concerned NOW is because the team has changed drastically from last year.

Don't assume we are friends, because I guarantee we are not.

 

[switz]

Don't assume we are friends, because I guarantee we are not.

I wouldn't think so since neither one of us knows the other enough to like or trust However, the expression "my friend" is often used in reference to persons an individual is acquainted with. In that respect, as mere acquaintances, having crossed paths due to one common ground, that is fantasy football, the address of "my friend" is more than proper according to the English language.However, as evidenced in this thread, your grasp of the English language is far from solid.Now my intentions here are not to be insulting, despite your attempts to be so, without any cause, having not even read my posts throughly enough to garner reason. I merely wanted to explain why the term "my friend" was perfectly appropriate to save you from any embarrassment later if someone uses that term in reference to you. I would hate to see you overreact or anything due to a lack of knowledge.

 

[Irish]

I wouldn't think so since neither one of us knows the other enough to like or trust However, the expression "my friend" is often used in reference to persons an individual is acquainted with. In that respect, as mere acquaintances, having crossed paths due to one common ground, that is fantasy football, the address of "my friend" is more than proper according to the English language.However, as evidenced in this thread, your grasp of the English language is far from solid.Now my intentions here are not to be insulting, despite your attempts to be so, without any cause, having not even read my posts throughly enough to garner reason. I merely wanted to explain why the term "my friend" was perfectly appropriate to save you from any embarrassment later if someone uses that term in reference to you. I would hate to see you overreact or anything due to a lack of knowledge.

I don't care what context you use the word, we are not friends. I steer clear of shallow minded people who try to ridicule people because they have different views and seek out acceptance with people with the same view point. You add nothing constructive to this board. I don't doubt my intelligence one bit, the exact opposite of you. What I have found out in life is when people put other people down about a certain subject it is because they have doubts about themselves. Keep talking and maybe one day you will believe it.

 

[joffer]

:11:

 

[Dman30]

I see Switz crawled out of his hole after sulking Garrison Hearst was C-U-T!

 

[switz]

I don't care what context you use the word, we are not friends. I steer clear of shallow minded people who try to ridicule people because they have different views and seek out acceptance with people with the same view point.

Pot meet kettle? We all do that to some extent or another on this board.As for insulting people who don't share a point of view - exactly what have you done in this thread regarding my posts? Did you read them? No - you immediately began insulting me without even taking the 3 seconds to se exactly what I posted, or what it was in reference to.

You add nothing constructive to this board.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but the majority of posters I'm certain feel differently. Most of my posts are well seasoned with reasoning, logic, and evidence. While I may draw a different conclusion than another, it doesn't mean it's not constructive.

I don't doubt my intelligence one bit, the exact opposite of you.

I have no reason to doubt my intelligence, and seriously I have no questions about it at all. I could go into the typical rant citing sources or data proving my intelligence, but I have no reason to.

What I have found out in life is when people put other people down about a certain subject it is because they have doubts about themselves. Keep talking and maybe one day you will believe it.

Yes, and when people pick on you it's because they're jealous. Sometimes people pick on you simply because they're mean. And sometimes it's simply because you're weird. Sometimes it had to do with mob mentality, and sometimes it has to do with chemistry.I digress. I find it infinitely ridiculous that you want to call me out with wild accdusations of doing nothing but what you've done towards me since the very beginning.So steer clear - I hope it makes you feel you are better than you are. Live your illusion my friend.

 

[chinawildman]

it's a whole new team/coaching staff, so aside from the team still being called the 49ers, much has changed so you can't just automatically expect same result.

Of course it's silly to "automatically" expect the same results, but as we have seen in the NFL, the presence of a good passing game has little to nothing to do with the ability of a team to run the football and in turn the value of that team's RB. I would also argue that the success of a team (W/L) as well as their defense has little to do with it as well, especially considering Barlow is a good receiver out of the backfield and plays all 3 downs.

 

[Irish]

Pot meet kettle? We all do that to some extent or another on this board.As for insulting people who don't share a point of view - exactly what have you done in this thread regarding my posts? Did you read them? No - you immediately began insulting me without even taking the 3 seconds to se exactly what I posted, or what it was in reference to.I'm sorry you feel that way, but the majority of posters I'm certain feel differently. Most of my posts are well seasoned with reasoning, logic, and evidence. While I may draw a different conclusion than another, it doesn't mean it's not constructive.I have no reason to doubt my intelligence, and seriously I have no questions about it at all. I could go into the typical rant citing sources or data proving my intelligence, but I have no reason to.Yes, and when people pick on you it's because they're jealous. Sometimes people pick on you simply because they're mean. And sometimes it's simply because you're weird. Sometimes it had to do with mob mentality, and sometimes it has to do with chemistry.I digress. I find it infinitely ridiculous that you want to call me out with wild accdusations of doing nothing but what you've done towards me since the very beginning.So steer clear - I hope it makes you feel you are better than you are. Live your illusion my friend.

Keep talking and you just might convince yourself.

 

[switz]

Keep talking and you just might convince yourself.

Sad, truly sad. You couldn't even have taken the time to read it, because there wasn't enough time between m ypost and yours for it to have been read.It's one thing when people can't see things a certain way, but quite another when they simply refuse to try.Just remember Irish, the things you hate most in others are usually the things you hate about yourself, and everytime you point a finger, there are three of your own pointing right back at yourself.

 

[Irish]

Sad, truly sad. You couldn't even have taken the time to read it, because there wasn't enough time between m ypost and yours for it to have been read.It's one thing when people can't see things a certain way, but quite another when they simply refuse to try.Just remember Irish, the things you hate most in others are usually the things you hate about yourself, and everytime you point a finger, there are three of your own pointing right back at yourself.

I am more advanced in the reading dept than you, cause I did read it. Now your Kindergarten teacher is calling on you.

 

[switz]

I am more advanced in the reading dept than you, cause I did read it. Now your Kindergarten teacher is calling on you.

:rotflmao: :rotflmao:

I steer clear of shallow minded people who try to ridicule people

Pot meet kettle?

 

[footballman_696969]

I wouldn't say it's ridiculous to say that Barlow has just as much talent as LT2. He hasn’t had the opportunity to be a starting RB. We'll have to wait until next season to find out. I can't seem to remember what round Barlow was drafted in or what the scouts were saying about him. Does anyone know where I can find this info?

 

[switz]

I wouldn't say it's ridiculous to say that Barlow has just as much talent as LT2. He hasn’t had the opportunity to be a starting RB. We'll have to wait until next season to find out. I can't seem to remember what round Barlow was drafted in or what the scouts were saying about him. Does anyone know where I can find this info?

3rd round - PittsburghMost scouts' biggest issues was with his attitude and discipline. I've posted a number of scout's take on him in the past on the board. You can use google to find some still. His attitude changed dramatically last season.The hype involving KB originally began because reportedly Shanahan said he was the best RB in the draft, and Shanny is an great talent evaluator for RBs. Some never let go after he couldn't beat out Hearst and kept getting dinged, but last season he exploded and rewarded the very patient owners.He's not a very tough runner, not according to scouts, nor his coaches just this past year. He statistically isn't great up the middle either. However, he's got tremendous aceleration, is quick to break outside, and will get you long TD runs. And as he hits the weights and toughens up, his frame will allow him to be a very tough runner if he tries.His pass catching wasn't a strong point in college, but he has been superb at it in the NFL. His blocking still needs to improve, but he has grown quite a bit.He really isn't in the same class of RBs as LT though... despite his not having the same opportunities, he did initially come in to a far better situation than LT, and could not win the job. Until this year, no one would argue that Barlow has had a tremendously superior cast surrounding him than LT has. Yet LT is on pace to break HOF records...

 

[footballman_696969]

thanks switzEdit: Got any info on Lamont Jordan?

 

[aaronr28]

I wouldn't say it's ridiculous to say that Barlow has just as much talent as LT2.

Do you honestly think LT2 would have sat behind another RB for 3 years?One was drafted top-5 in the draft, the other was drafted in the 3rd round.One is the best RB in the league, the other is probably above average.Equating these 2 in terms of talent or ability is, indeed, ridiculous.

 

[jurb26]

Do you honestly think LT2 would have sat behind another RB for 3 years?

Do you honestly think that Barlow would have sat behind the guys SD has on their roster other than LT? If the two guys switched teams there is no way Barlow is spliting carries Chappman and Johnson. Opportunity means a ton to RBs.

 

[switz]

Edit: Got any info on Lamont Jordan?

Oh boy, Jordan? Heir apparent to Curtis Martin2nd rounder - MarylandPower runner, shifty but a bit stiff, not extremely fast or explosive. Is very good inside, and quickly spots cutback lanes, his biggest issue is speed. He's a fair receiver, I honestly don't know how he did as a receiver in college. Came out as one of those RBs that probably would never be a stud, but had possibility to be a decent starting RB.I really haven't done as much research on him as I should...

 

[footballman_696969]

Do you honestly think that Barlow would have sat behind the guys SD has on their roster other than LT? If the two guys switched teams there is no way Barlow is spliting carries Chappman and Johnson. Opportunity means a ton to RBs.

What he said

 

[switz]

Do you honestly think that Barlow would have sat behind the guys SD has on their roster other than LT? If the two guys switched teams there is no way Barlow is spliting carries Chappman and Johnson. Opportunity means a ton to RBs.

I tihnk you guys need to meet in the middle. Barlow likely would not have sat behind Chapman, but probably would have split time with Jenkins IMO due to blocking and receiving (although Barlow is superb at it now.)However, even as a FT starter, I don't think it's even reasonable to conclude Barlow would have put up 60% of LT's numbers in SD. Different type of runners, LT is able to get away from SD's awful OL, I'm not sure Barlow has the vision inside to do it.But that's just MO. I guess it's really ridiculous in any instance to compare an umproven up and comer to a guy having an HOF career.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Do you honestly think that Barlow would have sat behind the guys SD has on their roster other than LT?

nope, but we wouldnt be having this conversation if he played in SanDiego, because nobody, not even Irish, would be considering him as a top 10 RB.

 

[aaronr28]

Do you honestly think that Barlow would have sat behind the guys SD has on their roster other than LT? If the two guys switched teams there is no way Barlow is spliting carries Chappman and Johnson. Opportunity means a ton to RBs.

If you put them both on the same NFL team, who is going to be the starting RB?LT every time.People who try to compare the ability and talent level of these two either are way too high on Barlow or just not appreciative of how good LT2 is.LT2 may have had more opportunity, but his supporting cast has been miserable. He's probably done more with less than any RB since Barry Sanders, and even Sanders had a better offensive line to work with and Herman Moore at WR.LT2 is a hall of fame RB and the best in the game. Barlow is not even close to his level.

 

[jurb26]

I tihnk you guys need to meet in the middle. Barlow likely would not have sat behind Chapman, but probably would have split time with Jenkins IMO due to blocking and receiving (although Barlow is superb at it now.)However, even as a FT starter, I don't think it's even reasonable to conclude Barlow would have put up 60% of LT's numbers in SD. Different type of runners, LT is able to get away from SD's awful OL, I'm not sure Barlow has the vision inside to do it.But that's just MO. I guess it's really ridiculous in any instance to compare an umproven up and comer to a guy having an HOF career.

This is all very true. Don't get me wrong. By no means am I trying to proclaim Barlow as a better tallent or player than LT. That would be foolish seeing how LT has performed thus far. I'm mearly trying to point out to some people that Barlow's complete tallents have not yet been unleashed, as he has never had the opp. to use them all seeing that he had to split time. Now we can go on and on about why that is and prob. get no where. I will however say that Barlow had much better tallent than his draft position would indicate as he was regarded as a troubled kid from Pittsburgh. Teams looked at him much like Moss in that they loved his ability but weren't sure about his mental composure.It is also clear that they have different styles. LT is more of a speed RB hitting the corner and can run between the tackles as well. Catches the ball out of the backfield and is by all means a all-purpose back like Faulk or Edge. Barlow is a big guy who runs better through the line IMO but doesn't have quit the speed as LT. He does however have very good speed for how big he is (ala the 80 some odd run vs. Pitt.) so he can take it to the house when needed. All in all he is more like a Coreyu Dillon in his style though.I guess the main problem I have with what a lot of guys are stating is that they are acting like players can't come from the wood-work in the NFL. That because LT was a top 5 pick and Barlow was 3rd round they casn't possibly have sillimar tallent. What about Portis, Davis, Holmes.... the list goes no and on. I have said it before and I'll stand by it now. Opportunity means more for RBs than any other position and a lot of times can mean more than tallent. Granted great players will find a way to produce regardless. But even the Priest Holmes of the world can't break records without the opportunity to do so.

 

[jurb26]

If you put them both on the same NFL team, who is going to be the starting RB?

Depends on the coach. If Shanny had them it would be RBBC.

 

[aaronr28]

I understand your point. But, if Barlow was anywhere near as talented as LT2, I think it would have shown itself in practice, in preseason, and in games over the past 3 NFL seasons.Priest Holmes is a rare example...but I'm still not convinced that he would be anywhere near as successful if you swapped him and LT2.

 

[jurb26]

I understand your point. But, if Barlow was anywhere near as talented as LT2, I think it would have shown itself in practice, in preseason, and in games over the past 3 NFL seasons.Priest Holmes is a rare example...but I'm still not convinced that he would be anywhere near as successful if you swapped him and LT2.

I agree in normal circumstances. But lets not forget that Barlow is no rocket scientist. He had a lot of trouble learning all the aspects of the NFL, which left the window for Hearst IMO. All this stated I won't be taking him before the mid 2nd.

 

[chinawildman]

Equating these 2 in terms of talent or ability is, indeed, ridiculous.

Tell that to Walsh or Shanahan. Barlow was the 2nd RB on SF's board in 2001.

 

[aaronr28]

Tell that to Walsh or Shanahan. Barlow was the 2nd RB on SF's board in 2001.

how do you think they'd compare the 2 right now?

 

[jurb26]

how do you think they'd compare the 2 right now?

Are you implying that Shanny might admite being wrong? I think we all know that is not happening.

 

[smlevin]

Just chiming in b/c , while I thought this was simply an old thread being revived, I looked through it and saw all the old familiar names and arguments, but it was a Barlow thread w/o my name involved anywhere.Anyway - the second and third posts on the first page answered this question (if that's what it was) sufficiently - any featuire can be top-10, but just keep in mnd that Barlow has to leapfrog some big names to get there in 2004.I think this will probably be the 4th year running where it will be impossible to draft Kevan Barlow for decent value.

 

[chinawildman]

how do you think they'd compare the 2 right now?

I think there's a general misunderstanding here when it comes to the term "comparison". We've all seen tomlinson play and know where his talent level lies. When jurb and I say that he's comparable, it means we think he has the physical ability to be on tomlinson's level, not that he's already there. When I hear the term "talent", I think raw physical ability, not whether it's been demonstrated already. I'm sure Walsh and Shanahan were very high on Barlow because they know what kind of RB he CAN be because he has all the physical tools. Do you disagree with me there?Besides, as previously stated, they are 2 different kinds of backs. While tomlinson is more of a faulk like back, Barlow I would compare to a Fred Taylor (not Corey Dillon), a big shifty back with receiving ability and a homerun threat (not to mention the fragility as well). Anyway, I'm sure there will be tons of Barlow threads before the season even starts... unfortunately the "what ifs", "should bes", and "could haves" will only be answered by season's end. Alot of FBGers were already writing him off as "washed up" in the middle of last season, only to eat crow after Barlow's impressive display at season's end, and I will no doubt do the same if he doesn't display the kind of skill I think he possesses as a starter.

 

[BGP]

Steven DavisAge 30Career Carries: 1700 in 8 seasons.lol at 'old'Eddie GeorgeAge 30Career Carries: 2700 in 8 seasons. :rotflmao: one of these guys is 'old', one isn't.

Doug Drinen of pro-football-reference.com did a study a few years ago that suggested number of carries is hardly a factor in predicting RB durability. The fact is that RB is a young man's position. Few have produced stud numbers much beyond 30 years of age. Faulk's decline should have been expected - his best years are behind him. What Priest Holmes did was amazing, but I still view him as high risk simply due to his age.