I think it's more performance related than workload related. Any running back is more suceptible to injury with an increased workload. MA is not any more of a risk than anyone else in the league in that respect. The fact that he's 32 yrs old doesn't mean much since he was a 27 yr old rookie. He's still running on fresh legs, especially since he had last year off. He hasn't taken the beating that other running backs that age have taken throughout their careers.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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!
Looks like T. Bell is going to get a chance to (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter BigTex
- Start date
Lombardi's Orphan Son
Footballguy
why do all of your posts on this subject contain minimal information and your opinion that MA is going to get hurt. Give it a break and lean on some chicks in another thread.MA played 16 games in 2000 and 2001, 15 in 2002, 12 in 2003 and was hurt last year. He's probably the toughest SOB on the team. Give it up.
-orphan
KnowledgeReignsSupreme
Footballguy
I can see C-Mart and Priest doing it.
KnowledgeReignsSupreme
Footballguy
WTF are you talking about you little punk ### #####? You give it up.Wow he played 15 games in 2002. With 84 carries #######.
I never opined MA is going to get hurt either, learn to read. I opined that he won't be able to stay productive at his age with the heavy workload Shanny gives his backs. He's broken down far better talents than MA in his tenure as a coach.
Now what was the great information your post contained? How many games he played when he wasn't a starter? Wow that's fantastic, great stuff there. Backups who get 80 carries a season are tough SOBs.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
My local draft is tonight, and I can tell you right now that I won't end up with Anderson.
Why? Because someone is sure to take him higher than I am willing to.
Why? Because someone is sure to take him higher than I am willing to.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
Well certainly he represents value at that point. But he'll never get that far...How far would you let him slip? I let him go till the 5th and i had to get him...My local draft is tonight, and I can tell you right now that I won't end up with Anderson.
Why? Because someone is sure to take him higher than I am willing to.
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
I took a few of those classes. Ended up beating the hell out of the instructor.
Lombardi's Orphan Son
Footballguy
temper tantrum 
i didn't have to give much info against those posts, the year and number of games was quite enough. i could reiterrate the number of running backs there ... the fact that MA is a selfless team player who has switched back and forth from fb to rb depending upon what the team needs as well as all the marine %#@*, but i figured most here already were aware of those facts.-orphan
i didn't have to give much info against those posts, the year and number of games was quite enough. i could reiterrate the number of running backs there ... the fact that MA is a selfless team player who has switched back and forth from fb to rb depending upon what the team needs as well as all the marine %#@*, but i figured most here already were aware of those facts.-orphan
KnowledgeReignsSupreme
Footballguy
Unfortunately for you, we were talking about HB not FB. FB seems to be a position that lasts much longer in the NFL than HB.
But as you can see in your quote above, you claimed that he had 84 carries in 15 games, and therefore you claimed he was a backup RB, and therefore you claimed by implication he wasn't a tough SOB.You are clearly in the wrong. You also are severely underestimating Anderson.
Does that make me a little punk ### ##### too?
Last edited by a moderator:
KnowledgeReignsSupreme
Footballguy
I'll spell it out real simple for you since you seem hard headed.It's
hard
to
last
a
full
season
under
Shanahan's
workload
No one was talking about whether or not he could start 16 games as a FB. We were talking about the EFFECT of 23+ carries a game on a player his age. That has nothing to do whatsoever with him having started games as a FB 3 seasons ago. None whatosever.
I love how certain people just get their panties in a bunch when you say anything about a member of their home team.
It is hard to last a full season under many NFL workloads, but year in, year out players manage to do it.As I said before, everyone knows Priest is likely to get hurt, he still goes top 3. This is because if he stays healthy all year, he will likely be a top 3 back. So it is worth the risk.I have 3 questions for you:If Anderson stays healthy do you see him finishing in the top 5?If so, isn't the risk worth the reward?Is is more difficult to bear the load in Denver as it is KC?P.S. Personal attacks don't help you make your point, as a matter of fact they distract from it.
You'll have to excuse my lapse since your post above. I had a difficult time getting my panties out of a bunch.Carries per game by featured RB (in games where they were featured) since '95:
2001 ommitted because it was such a freakin' mess between 3 RBs)
Terrell Davis '95-'98 21.7 cpg
Olandis Gary '99 23.0 cpg
Mike Anderson '00 21.2 cpg
Clinton Portis '02-'03 21.1 cpg
Rueben Droughns '04 23.7 cpg
So the only RB that exceeded 23.0 cpg in his entire tenure coaching DEN was Droughns last season, and that was only because he was the only option available left at RB after all the injuries.
Why would you expect Anderson to get 23+ cpg when TD in his prime didn't & Portis didn't?
---------------------------------
Sorry, I'll go back to unbunching my little punk ### ##### panties now...
cstu
Footballguy
No, I think that CMart has the best chance of doing it since he's the healthiest of them all, like Emmitt was. Priest also has a very good chance as well. The problem I have is with the accepted notion that 3 RB's will do this year what hasn't been done once in 18 years.
Last edited by a moderator:
Men-in-Cleats
Footballguy
Anderson has not been a productive fantasy back since his rookie year. Not sure why people think he'll repeat that success again this year due to some good running in the preseason. He represents a good gamble if you can get him real cheap after you've established your starters at the skill positions, but he's a really risky proposition to be counted on as a starter. Also, with respect to the "he was a 27 year old rookie so he has fresh legs" comment, that is total crap. It is well documented that a 34 year old has a harder time recovering from a beating than a 24 year old. A well conditioned 30 something can obviously be productive and take the abuse but that has more to do with their conditioning in that year and their genetics than it does the amount of carries they've accumulated in their careers. Would a 40 year old rookie be considered to have "fresh legs"?
Well, what's the alternative?Bell?
If you look at his history (what little there is of it right now) some very troubling questions come up also.
He has had 2 decent games to date: 17 carries for 123 yds against the #31 run D of MIA last season & 16 carries for 91 yds against IND in week 17 when IND was resting its starters for a playoff run (starting with DEN). Aside from that, he hasn't gained more than 50 yds in an NFL regular season game.
What qualifies Bell as being the more capable RB in DEN? And why couldn't he take the job from Anderson when almost everyone in DEN was expecting him to do so?
Full disclaimer - before preseason started, I was convinced that Bell was easily the best option DEN had at RB
AeroFANatic
Footballguy
Yea, well.... 4 Hurricane's haven't hit FLORIDA in one season since the 30's...ooops, it happend last year.My point being, looking at PAST situations will only lead you to repeat mistakes.I for one am not thrilled with Anderson this year, but I do think Shanny will run him....alot.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kit Fisto
Footballguy
What, did all the Chris Brown/Travis Henry threads run out of gas? 
Seriously.Why does everyone get so worked up over the preseason? We see it time and time again how people blow up in preseason, only to have a miserable year. Most recent example: Ron Dayne 2004.Now I'm not saying Mike Anderson sucks, but temper your enthusiasm a little, Anderson-pimpers.
Seriously.Why does everyone get so worked up over the preseason? We see it time and time again how people blow up in preseason, only to have a miserable year. Most recent example: Ron Dayne 2004.Now I'm not saying Mike Anderson sucks, but temper your enthusiasm a little, Anderson-pimpers.
sheerterror
Footballguy
Wait, wait, wait. Are you serious?Isn't it medically logical to assume that a 32 year old back who has only been in the league for 5 years has a much better chance at recovering from weekly poundings than a 32 year old back who has been in the league for 10+ seasons that has yielded over 3000 carries? This isn't to suggest that Curtis Martin will get hurt, but I'm sure he's going to be in a buttload more pain after each week than Anderson given the amount of wear and tear he's had on his body from the last decade. I refuse to believe that these two are equal injury risks simply because they were born in the same year.
If you truly believe that age is the sole determining factor in a back's recovery ability, and not his mileage, then maybe you should be looking into a career in the medical field.
I think there is some hype surrounding his camp/pre season, but MOST of the hype is about him being declared the starter. Everyone knows they can potentially get top 5 numbers from whoever the starter is in den.What, did all the Chris Brown/Travis Henry threads run out of gas?
Seriously.
Why does everyone get so worked up over the preseason? We see it time and time again how people blow up in preseason, only to have a miserable year. Most recent example: Ron Dayne 2004.
Now I'm not saying Mike Anderson sucks, but temper your enthusiasm a little, Anderson-pimpers.
Construction Man Jim
Footballguy
I wouldn't describe being unable to play due to a very serious groin injury (muscle torn from the bone) as "having the year off"... It's not like he was backpacking with Ricky.
This is so insane. I am a Bell owner, and I can see Anderson is going to be the starter and there is no way to predict injuries. I would expect Anderson may not be Broncos RB next year, but then again he may be. Marcus Allen is one RB who comes to mind who was productive way past 32. As much as I would love for Bell to take the job, there is no reason to expect it to happen. And I think Dayne could also be #2 before long. The prevailing wisdom is that any RB can succeed in Denver. Droughns had done nothing to distinguish himself before getting a shot with Denver. Do you really think Dayne is that much worse that Droughns?I would say trading for Bell was one of my worse moves ever, and I have made some huge mistakes in the past. Bell owners give it up for God's sake!
Men-in-Cleats
Footballguy
Typical bumps and bruises heal up at the same rate whether you've had 1000 of them or whether you've had 10 of them. Why is Martin going to be hurting more after each week from bumps and bruises than Anderson is? Unless he's had more serious injuries that are going to cause problems long term, the day to day bumps and bruises heal up in the offseason and don't just accumulate indefinitely.When I crash my mountain bike I don't feel crashes that I did 10 years ago but I do notice that the ones I get now seem to bother me more than they used to a decade ago. Those crashes are going to hurt me just as much now as they would have if I took up the sport last year and hadn't had as many of them. Each one heals up more slowly than they used to but they each heal individually and don't accumulate.Wait, wait, wait. Are you serious?Isn't it medically logical to assume that a 32 year old back who has only been in the league for 5 years has a much better chance at recovering from weekly poundings than a 32 year old back who has been in the league for 10+ seasons that has yielded over 3000 carries? This isn't to suggest that Curtis Martin will get hurt, but I'm sure he's going to be in a buttload more pain after each week than Anderson given the amount of wear and tear he's had on his body from the last decade. I refuse to believe that these two are equal injury risks simply because they were born in the same year.
If you truly believe that age is the sole determining factor in a back's recovery ability, and not his mileage, then maybe you should be looking into a career in the medical field.
Men-in-Cleats
Footballguy
The only difference is that Droughn's hadn't had opportunity while Dayne has had a gazillion chances to prove himself and has failed every time.
I'm tired of arguing Bell vs. Anderson, so from now on, I'll just let it be known that I agree with everything Ponyboy says. We might disagree when speculating about the future, but I think he's demonstrated the strongest grasp on the boards of how Mike Shanahan and his offense ACTUALLY function.P.S. As I said, some research I've been doing has suggested that Denver RB workloads are towards the high end of the league, and any back has a tough time standing up to them, but only Kansas City is better on a points per touch basis, so in my mind, it's clearly worth the risk. Each extra carry increases the chance of injury... but it also gets you a lot more points, and by the time you've actually accumulated a significant enough workload to make a difference, you've already compiled quite a nice amount of fantasy points.Because of this, the numbers have lead me to believe that Denver RBs are worth their weight in gold in redraft leagues, but will never be elite options in dynasty leagues. I'm planning on doing some more research on the subject during the season, so I'll let you all know what the numbers say after the year's over.
Just took Mike Anderson in R#3 drafting from the 10 spot in a 12 team draft. I went Culpepper, TO in rounds 1 and 2, and then felt fortunate to get Anderson as my RB#1 in R3 - only back there at the time who I felt had a legitimate shot at a top 10 season. I think Skeletor has spoken in his way of speaking . . . Anderson's not touching the field this game . . . nor are the rest of the starters. They'll be resting up on the sidelines as the likes of Bell, Dayne and Griffin, w/ the 2d string O-line, battle it out for #2 and #3 spots in the lineup. Anderson's your man as the Broncos starting RB this year unless he loses the job through an extended injury. Tater's not gonna get the chance to outply him, with the handful of carries he MIGHT get if he beats out fat Dayne, b/c Skeletor likes to pound the rock with one guy. Can't see how MAs more of an injury risk than any other starting NFL running back, so pencil him in as a bargain right now - really should be going earlier than I took him.
Anderson was the team's most productive back in 2001, it just wasn't a very good season because of the utter mess that T.D.s constant return from injury created. In 2002, there were too many backs competing for a position, and Shanahan, in his desire to keep his best players on the field, shifted Anderson to FB so he could see some game action rather than wasting away on the bench. He then got switched back to RB after Portis got shipped out of town and had won the starting job outright last season before going down to injury.So... Anderson was Denver's best back in 2000 and 2001, was their best blocking back in 2002 and 2003, and was their best RB in 2004 preseason and 2005 preseason. Just some "historical trends" for you to take into consideration.
Raiders Fan
The Black Hole
Anderson looks to start the year as the #1 RB but I doubt he finishes it.. NOTHING is in stone yet.. Anderson has a TON to prove. It's one thing to do well in a handful of carries its another to do it week in and week out. Can his body hold up?? I don't think so but thats IMO.. I have both too.
To Terrell Davis. And actually TD was the week 1 starter, then got hurt. Anderson took over & started until TD came back.Let's see now...... hmmmmmmmmm......If I'm a HC, and I think both Terrell Davis & Mike Anderson are healthy, which one do I start....hmmmm..... hang on, let me think....
Last edited by a moderator:
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Raiders Fan
The Black Hole
Looking at your member number I will take it you didn't see the threads about Dayne LAST year. Where he looked like a monster in the preseason and all the hype about his chance only to see NOTHING. Dayne is DEPTH PERIOD!!! Nothing more.. If Anderson AND Bell get hurt he's your man for sure..
edit: damn spelling..
Last edited by a moderator:
I hate to break this to you, RF, but based upon first hand observations that coincide with the opinions of insiders here in DEN, Rockton's assessment is right on target - except for the chance to start/bulk of the carries part - which IMO would require an injury or major drop in production from Anderson.If you choose not to accept that, that's your perrogative. But facts is facts, and Dayne up to this point has outplayed Bell.Looking at your memeber number I will take it you didn't see the threads about Dayne LAST year. Where he looked like a monster in the preseason and all the hype about his chance only to see NOTHING. Dayne is DEPTH PERIOD!!! Nothing more.. If Anderson AND Bell get hurt he's your man for sure..
Last edited by a moderator:
Raiders Fan
The Black Hole
Not saying he hasn't but Bell will be the #2 for sure.. We know how Dayne is during regular season..I hate to break this to you, RF, but based upon first hand observations that coincide with the opinions of insiders here in DEN, Rockton's assessment is right on target - except for the chance to start/bulk of the carries part - which IMO would require an injury or major drop in production from Anderson.If you choose not to accept that, that's your perrogative. But facts is facts, and Dayne up to this point has outplayed Bell.Looking at your memeber number I will take it you didn't see the threads about Dayne LAST year. Where he looked like a monster in the preseason and all the hype about his chance only to see NOTHING. Dayne is DEPTH PERIOD!!! Nothing more.. If Anderson AND Bell get hurt he's your man for sure..
Can't say preseason results = new depth chart.. That's why Bell is still so highly touted in most places cause he better skills to succeed. Its a LONG season but if Anderson goes down I bet its Bell that steps in..It doesnt matter how highly touted Bell is on the forums and by fantasy football addicts. It matters what the Denver Broncos think. They have no loyalty to Bell. The cut Claret. At some point in the season Denver will want to see exactly what they have in Dayne. They already know what they have in Bell and they are not thrilled about it.Not saying he hasn't but Bell will be the #2 for sure.. We know how Dayne is during regular season..I hate to break this to you, RF, but based upon first hand observations that coincide with the opinions of insiders here in DEN, Rockton's assessment is right on target - except for the chance to start/bulk of the carries part - which IMO would require an injury or major drop in production from Anderson.If you choose not to accept that, that's your perrogative. But facts is facts, and Dayne up to this point has outplayed Bell.Looking at your memeber number I will take it you didn't see the threads about Dayne LAST year. Where he looked like a monster in the preseason and all the hype about his chance only to see NOTHING. Dayne is DEPTH PERIOD!!! Nothing more.. If Anderson AND Bell get hurt he's your man for sure..
Raiders Fan
The Black Hole
Clarett= shot in the dark PERIOD..Bell was a pick to be a future RB. Also Clarett had not guaranteed$$$ A lot easier to say bye.. How many years do we have to hear the same crap about Dayne? When will people realize he's nothing much?? This is a guy with a career YPC under 3.5.. In 4 years no less. When 5.0 is the mark of a good RB.. Dayne falls in line with an Alstott. Argue it all you want but facts are facts..It doesnt matter how highly touted Bell is on the forums and by fantasy football addicts. It matters what the Denver Broncos think. They have no loyalty to Bell. The cut Claret. At some point in the season Denver will want to see exactly what they have in Dayne. They already know what they have in Bell and they are not thrilled about it.Not saying he hasn't but Bell will be the #2 for sure.. We know how Dayne is during regular season..I hate to break this to you, RF, but based upon first hand observations that coincide with the opinions of insiders here in DEN, Rockton's assessment is right on target - except for the chance to start/bulk of the carries part - which IMO would require an injury or major drop in production from Anderson.If you choose not to accept that, that's your perrogative. But facts is facts, and Dayne up to this point has outplayed Bell.Looking at your memeber number I will take it you didn't see the threads about Dayne LAST year. Where he looked like a monster in the preseason and all the hype about his chance only to see NOTHING. Dayne is DEPTH PERIOD!!! Nothing more.. If Anderson AND Bell get hurt he's your man for sure..
Similar threads
