This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Me either, then again, I don't remember the last running back to put up Henry type numbers after "cracking his fibula." I think these coaches like giving us this type of information just to see fantasy football owners cry.
It turned out really good for me. I got 23 points from Barlow, and would have got 1 point from the Chad. Starting Barlow has given me the chance to actually come back and beat the Portis (66 points!) owner. I need 21 points from Holt.I'm telling you, my team is unreal. I put up a ton of points every week. But every week I get some team that blows up against me. Portis set the scoring record in our league. My team put up very good points, but I need 150 yards and 1 TD from Holt tonight to tie it. If we tie, I'm set cause bench scoring breaks the ties.That's putting your balls on the table, I like that. Good luck, I hope it works out well for you. Repost after this weeks games and we'll either seeor
What's with this additional chest thumping? What does this have to do with this thread? It's only purpose is to somehow salvage your ego. Are we to assume you would not eat crow on this if you did not have Portis LT2 and Boldin on your team? I also have all 3 of these guys on various teams around the league. Does that somehow also make me special? No. All you have to mention is how wrong you were, nothing else.Here's your bag since you aren't wearing one yet.
Now move along.
At least switz thinks for a second or two before he posts.
Sorry you took it that way, I was in a good mood because of that game.
Probably nothing.
Not really.
You can "assu" all you want, but leave "me" out of it.
Probably not. I happened to draft LT in the first round last year, Portis in the 5th (trading up to do so). Boldin I got in my rookie draft this year. It's a dynasty league. I'm sorry you got them all in different leagues, maybe if you had them all in one league you wouldn't be so bitter.
All I have to do is post whatsoever I wish unless I get banned from this board, and if I deserve getting banned from this board for being wrong about Barlow vs. AZ and having the gall to admit it then I've severly underestimated the administrators of this board.It's funny, if I had refrained from posting, people would say I ducked away. I come and admit I was wrong and people aren't happy with me doing that because it's not exactly how they want it.
Switz, again you don't get it! You can't just eat crow like smelvin did. Look at his post and contrast it with yours. You always end with a shot at how you're right about something else (Boldin, Portis, etc).Smelvin takes it like he should
You use a time when you should be eating crow to try and make a parting shot on how "smart" you are by mentioning meaningless dribble. "Sure I made a mistake with Barlow, but did you know I invested in Microsoft in the early 80's! That makes me special and very smart even though I dropped the ball TOTALLY on Barlow. See I am really a smart and very savvy guy EVEN THOUGH I WAS WRONG. Let my pound my chest a bit more as I eat some more crow! Did you know I have LT2 and Boldin on my team! I am so great!" You just don't show good character with your posts, even when you are supposedly "eating your crow". You end up using it as an opportunity to say how "smart you really are." Even now you proclaim how you can't win no matter what you say. That is because you spew so much BS about how great you are at every opportunity your get, even when you are clearly wrong. You just don't get it.
I don't think smlevin nor I need to take anything from you, seeing as you didn't post BEFORE the game.I was surprised at how close alot of you were though, there were a few who had 145/2TD or so as the prediction, almost right onSmelvin takes it like he should
Anyone who didn't write BEFORE really has nothing to say now. 
Any the funniest thing is that my original comments weren't that inflammatory. 
Kevan Barlow didn't look near as good as Onterrio Smith has all year, heh Switz!!!!!!!!!!I don't think smlevin nor I need to take anything from you, seeing as you didn't post BEFORE the game.I was surprised at how close alot of you were though, there were a few who had 145/2TD or so as the prediction, almost right on
FOOL
The fact is... when given starter opportunity, Barlow put up the highest individual rushing total (in 3 quarters of play) for a SF back since Charlie garner in week 4 of 2000. Was this coincidence? Maybe he's just a better RB than you thought (imagine that?!)
Sometimes the most clear and obvious answer is the right one, and maybe you should reevaluate your position on Barlow instead of digging for excuses of why he succeeded yesterday. You may say that you're eating crow, but it just seems that you're trying to set yourself up for a big "I told you so" once he has a bad game.
cwm, I've already admitted that Barlow looked good yesterday, much better than I expected.I do reserve the right though to not proclaim Barlow that incredible based on one performance against a D that allowed Brock Forsey to put up nearly the same numbers a week previously.Barlow had a great game. If anyone didn't start him based on what I said, then I apologize, I was a fool for not recognizing Barlow would have a field day against AZ. In retrospect it was really stupid considering Barlow's speed, and AZ's pathetic D.I really expected them to tighten up, and Barlow to dance alot more than he did. I was wrong.I don't have to change my opinion because I was wrong about that one game, nor do I have to change it to admit I was wrong.The fact is... when given starter opportunity, Barlow put up the highest individual rushing total (in 3 quarters of play) for a SF back since Charlie garner in week 4 of 2000. Was this coincidence? Maybe he's just a better RB than you thought (imagine that?!)
Sorry, looked through the pages for your avatar and didn't find it... I see it now.Yes I did, several times. Search for Barlow and mnmplayer. Once again you are inaccurate, just like your fumble theaory, but we all know how talented you are at picking RBs so you don't need to remind us.
Just re-reading this and went huh?Hearst has 2038 touches, 28 fumbles (sure he recovered 11, but he still dropped the ball, right?)28/2038 = 1.37%Barlow has 465 touches, 6 fumbles = 1.29%But let's look at Hearst as a 49er, 13 fumbles in 1363 touches = 0.9%Hearst's fumbling career percentage is skewed by a bad year (his final in Az) where he dropped 12 balls, and lost 8 of them. That was 8 years ago.Anyway, Barlow doesn't drop the ball as much as I thought. I remember him losing a big one in a gmae against NO last year, and I know he's dropped it a few times this year.In fact, this year he has 3 drops in 159 touches, 1.8% of his touches. I'd say that has a greater affect on Erickson than his last two years. Hearst this year is 2 in 203 touches, 0.9% again. I see you were going by fumbles lost, but don't all fumbles offer the possibility of losing the ball? Anyway, you're probably right, Erickson wasn't worried at all about Barlow losing the grip on the ball if he tried to punch it in from short yardage. I don't know why he would pull him unless a) he thought the other options were better in short yardage or b) he was worried about the ball dropping or c) he didn't want to lose Barlow to injury seeing Hearst was already out.
Sure - maybe that was it. Then explain why Garcia ran in two and Beasley had an attempt at a 1 yard plunge. They never even tried running Barlow at the goalline.Believe it or not I wan't trying to be argumentative with that discussion. Just outlining why I felt Erickson may not have used him.Anyway, your option d was covered by my option a
I honestly think it was one of those situations where the coach was trying to be cute. Instead of just doing the expected thing and give it to the RB who'd been having a good day, Erickson tried to catch the Cardinals off balance. That would explain the TD passes to Owens and even the rushing attempt by Beasley. I didn't see Garcia's first TD, but his second one came on a scramble on a pass attempt. Shanahan was doing that repeatedly with Portis for much of this season. Thank God (speaking as Portis owner) he's stopped doing that lately and Portis has been getting the short-yardage scores again. But even yesterday, Plummer's only TD came off play-action because the Chiefs were so worried about Portis. Sometimes that stuff can work, other times (like when the Panthers tried it last night before going back to Davis for the TD), it doesn't. It just sucks for Barlow owners that it worked because he could have easily gotten 2 more TDs on Sunday and maybe even 3.
Just want to close the loop on this.First off, what possible reason could you have to compare only games with 15-18 carries? I understand limiting the top end to 18, since that is Barlow's max. But why 15 and not 14, 13, ..., etc.? The only reason I can imagine is that it fits your perspective better.That said, here are their rushing numbers in their games with 15-18 carries (including yesterday, of course).LT: 8 games, 132/657, 4.98 ypcKB: 7 games, 112/559, 4.99 ypcLooks like yesterday's performance rendered whatever your point was about 15-18 carry games moot.
weird. must be something with nested quotes, that's what seemed to be the hiccup in my replying to yours originally... anyway
Actually it was from the "not enough carries to be considered a chance" argument, i.e. until he gets 20 carries a game, and in reality most starting RBs get 15-18. It wasn't intentionally arbitrary, nor was it a selected sample to "fit my perspective better." I know other RBs have said they don't get warmed up until they get 15 carries or so.
True enough, Barlow had a spectacular game against Arizona Sunday. Cinci will likely be another start for him, and probably a decent outing. I would say after the Cinci game we'll have a better idea of Barlow's capabilities as a starter. That's not meant to take away from his AZ game, well yes I guess it is, AZ is pathetic, and IMO not a real measure of Barlow's abilities. Cinci isn't tremendously better (I think statistically worse) but at this point in the season, I think they represent a more valid test.BTW JWB, I appreciate your ability to debate things with me without getting personal, insultory, or obscene. I respect you for that.
The Bengals' run defense is actually worse than Arizona's so Barlow is looking terrific again this week. And if he does keep the starting job, he finishes with the Eagles and Seattle, two more teams than can be run on with ease, so his chances to be a tremendous fantasy option from here on out are excellent.
Over the year that's true, but Cinci hasn't been that bad recently, until last weekWeek 11 - Holmes 16/62/3.9Week 12 - LT2 16/95/5.9 (had a nice 38 yard run)Week 13 - Bettis 20/62/3.1Week 14 - J Lewis 30/180/6.0 (well, he dominated
)but for the three week's previous they had tightened it up a bit...
His schedule is perfect for fantasy playoffs as long as he remains the starter no doubt.
You left out a rather important element -- TDs. Week 11 -- 0 Week 12 -- 1 Week 13 -- 1 Week 14 -- 3 In the last four games, they've given up 5 TD runs. Even if you reduce Lewis' monster game by 1 or 2 TDs, that's still about a TD per week they've allowed which again enhances Barlow's fantasy potential. And we know Barlow has the explosiveness to score from long range as he did against the Steelers and Cards. The Niners have definitely been a Jekyll and Hyde team, but this is a very exploitable matchup for their running game. It's pretty hard not to like Barlow a lot this week once again.Over the year that's true, but Cinci hasn't been that bad recently, until last weekWeek 11 - Holmes 16/62/3.9Week 12 - LT2 16/95/5.9 (had a nice 38 yard run)Week 13 - Bettis 20/62/3.1Week 14 - J Lewis 30/180/6.0 (well, he dominated
It's hard to predict TDs, especially since Erickson wasn't using Barlow at the goalline
I agree is an attractive matchup. I don't see anywhere I said it wasn't. Realistically it's likely Barlow will get 90+ yards and a TD. That's 15 points in my league. I don't expect 154 yards again though.
Neither do I. I think 90-plus and a TD is about right. Last week I thought 85-plus and a TD was in line with what he could get. As far as the TDs, I agree they're impossible to really predict most weeks. However, I really think what happened last week was a fluke. Barlow has been used near the goal line in the past so there's no specific reason to believe what we saw against the Cardinals was a permanent move. If they get 4 shots inside the 4 again, I'd be shocked if Barlow didn't get at least one chance.
I know you're just waiting for my approval now aren't you... I like the Cinci matchup for the most part, at least I like the defense matchup. It's the Cinci offense that scares me. The dangerous thing about this matchup for Barlow is if the game gets out of hand, and it might, the 9ers could be chasing the Bengals by 20 or more points by the 3rd quarter because they have the weapons in Kitna/Johnson/Warrick/Johnson/Dillon to blow out the niners. I am especially fearful of the duo of Warrick and Chad Johnson getting out to a big lead, then the pounding and time management of Dillon/Johnson to hold the lead and the ball.If the game is close or the 9ers lead I predict 120/25/2 Barlow. If Cinci busts out to an early lead I predict 65/35/0Actually I think Ericson is just on the 'must have a designated goalline back' fad sweeping the league. I dont understand it myself, but its a copycat league as they say. Look at Tiki, Dorsey has been held out of the endzone easilly as many times since he's been goallining as tiki was, but they keep going Dorsey. Inexplicable. Note to headcoaches, RBs dont like to haul the rock 80 yards and then let some bench warmer grab the touch. It takes them out of their rythem. The best thing that can happen to a RBs psych is to blast through a defense stacked up to stock him. He aint getting that rush standing on the sideline. Just say no to goalline backs.
2 touchdowns for Barlow today2 fumbles for Barlow so far today...
151 total yards, averaged 4.7 ypc 
I'll give that ai am glad to see Barlow putting up good #s the last 2 games. I have been sitting on him for 3 years in my dynasty league.2 touchdowns for Barlow today2 fumbles for Barlow so far today...
as Barlow helps me get a first round win.switz = 
Please crawl back under your rock.Funny it was never bumped last year or even 2004. Why?
Please crawl back under your rock.Funny it was never bumped last year or even 2004. Why?
good answer, my point was proven. Though I do have higher hopes for Barlow this year. He still couldn't hold Hearst's jock strap
How's your boy Onterrio Smith doing? OH, that's right...not even in the NFL.Please crawl back under your rock.Funny it was never bumped last year or even 2004. Why?
Yep, just like Ricky Williams, who many hypes.. woo hoo, way to change the subject.How's your boy Onterrio Smith doing? OH, that's right...not even in the NFL.
Michael Turner (behind LT), Larry Johnson (behind Priest), Shaun Alexander (behind Ricky Watters) come to mind.
