I really like the Barlow/Gore combo this year, only because Norv turner does bring alot to the table. And they improved the offensive line.....I recently selected the both in a Draft Masters at the end of the 7th and begining of the 8th. As my #3 RB.
didn't all the "Turner loves RBs" folks get burned by him not that long ago? I'm drawing a blank on where he's been latelyI really like the Barlow/Gore combo this year, only because Norv turner does bring alot to the table. And they improved the offensive line.....I recently selected the both in a Draft Masters at the end of the 7th and begining of the 8th. As my #3 RB.
Turner doesn't do RBBC, and someone is cheap, and a nice bye week starter....
I'm pretty sure you're refering to Norv Turner and the '04 Raiders. Some people were moderately high on Fargas in Turner's first year with the team, but they had little talent in that backfield with Fargas, Wheatley, and Zereoue- much less than Gore/Barlow. The group of Raider backs that year performed poorly and were hurt but I doubt anyone spent significant draft choices on any of those players. So, burnt doesn't seem the right word for that situation. And '05 didn't turn out poorly for those that took an early chance on Lamont Jordan.didn't all the "Turner loves RBs" folks get burned by him not that long ago? I'm drawing a blank on where he's been latelyI really like the Barlow/Gore combo this year, only because Norv turner does bring alot to the table. And they improved the offensive line.....I recently selected the both in a Draft Masters at the end of the 7th and begining of the 8th. As my #3 RB.
Turner doesn't do RBBC, and someone is cheap, and a nice bye week starter....
That's basically what I was getting at. Someone is cheap, with an offensive coordinator who will pound him....I like Gores Upside, but if either are out of the picture the other one is pure value.Bri, not sure what you mean. Can you clarify?Barlow also received a nice $$ bonus last pre-season. The injury history of Gore has to be a concern too. Give him a full season without issue and maybe we could see Barlow land in Denver (not a rumor, just speculation from Shanny's comments on him when drafted).
With SF lacking a WR stud, and the highly regarded Rookie TE Vernon Davis, I believe the RBBC could be a useful tool this yr. I don't want to predict how the carries will be split, but I believe if both are 100% healthy, Gore will provide more value. He has shown more heart to product than Barlow. Barlow has had the opportunity already and did nothing with it. Barlow could not beat out Garrison Hearst when he was injured!
I put more faith in Gore. FWIW: I own both in 1 league.
Barlow played reasonably well last year considering the state of the team -- he was one of the few bright spots.It's really time to pull the plug on Barlow. I would have thought last year would have sealed his fate but the 49ers apparantly just can't get enough of this bad RB.
Are you kidding me? What exactly do you consider reasonably well? Is it his astounding 3.3 ypc average? Or is it the amazing feat of rushing for 27 yards less than Gore.... with 49 more attempts? If you're going on the fact that the team around him totally sucked I'll give you that, but he was certainly part of the problem, not one of the bright spots.Barlow played reasonably well last year considering the state of the team -- he was one of the few bright spots.It's really time to pull the plug on Barlow. I would have thought last year would have sealed his fate but the 49ers apparantly just can't get enough of this bad RB.
I watched nearly every SF game last year, and Barlow was one of the few bright spots. He ran hard, despite being swarmed nearly every play by defenders because the O line was swiss cheese.If you're going to quote Barlow vs. Gore stats, it's very difficult to compare the two. Gore got a lot of his yards in garbage time when Ds were set up to stop the pass (72 yd run vs. Washington's 2nd string D late in the game). Gore did look good in the last couple of games, though Houston certainly had one of the worst defenses in the league.Are you kidding me? What exactly do you consider reasonably well? Is it his astounding 3.3 ypc average? Or is it the amazing feat of rushing for 27 yards less than Gore.... with 49 more attempts? If you're going on the fact that the team around him totally sucked I'll give you that, but he was certainly part of the problem, not one of the bright spots.Barlow played reasonably well last year considering the state of the team -- he was one of the few bright spots.It's really time to pull the plug on Barlow. I would have thought last year would have sealed his fate but the 49ers apparantly just can't get enough of this bad RB.
You watched nearly every SF game last year, which now explains why you'd defend Barlow... you're an SF fan. But Barlow has been bad for a long time. He's had one mediocre season in a 5 year career. It's perfectly correct to compare him and Gore, they're on the same team. And I'd disagree with you about him running hard. I watched many SF games myself last year, unfortunately that's almost all you get to see in my area, and I watched him give up on plays all the time. I thought Gore ran much, much harder than Barlow did when given the chance. Barlow has one thing going for him... decent power. That's it. And in an offense as horrific as SF's that style of runner is a bad fit. Stick him on KC or another already solid running team and he'd be OK. As an SF fan I'd think you'd be about ready to get rid of Barlow. The guy is just not good, and all his stats over the last 2 years really back that up. What he did 3 years ago is irrelevant.I watched nearly every SF game last year, and Barlow was one of the few bright spots. He ran hard, despite being swarmed nearly every play by defenders because the O line was swiss cheese.If you're going to quote Barlow vs. Gore stats, it's very difficult to compare the two. Gore got a lot of his yards in garbage time when Ds were set up to stop the pass (72 yd run vs. Washington's 2nd string D late in the game). Gore did look good in the last couple of games, though Houston certainly had one of the worst defenses in the league.Are you kidding me? What exactly do you consider reasonably well? Is it his astounding 3.3 ypc average? Or is it the amazing feat of rushing for 27 yards less than Gore.... with 49 more attempts? If you're going on the fact that the team around him totally sucked I'll give you that, but he was certainly part of the problem, not one of the bright spots.Barlow played reasonably well last year considering the state of the team -- he was one of the few bright spots.It's really time to pull the plug on Barlow. I would have thought last year would have sealed his fate but the 49ers apparantly just can't get enough of this bad RB.
I'm not saying Barlow is better than Gore (I think a healthy Gore is significantly better than Barlow) I'm just saying Barlow ran hard and looked pretty good, he wasn't part of the problem IMO. He's a decent RB but not a guy who can compensate for a poor offensive line/WRs/QB.
You watched nearly every SF game last year, which now explains why you'd defend Barlow... you're an SF fan. But Barlow has been bad for a long time. He's had one mediocre season in a 5 year career. It's perfectly correct to compare him and Gore, they're on the same team. And I'd disagree with you about him running hard. I watched many SF games myself last year, unfortunately that's almost all you get to see in my area, and I watched him give up on plays all the time. I thought Gore ran much, much harder than Barlow did when given the chance. Barlow has one thing going for him... decent power. That's it. And in an offense as horrific as SF's that style of runner is a bad fit. Stick him on KC or another already solid running team and he'd be OK. As an SF fan I'd think you'd be about ready to get rid of Barlow. The guy is just not good, and all his stats over the last 2 years really back that up. What he did 3 years ago is irrelevant.I watched nearly every SF game last year, and Barlow was one of the few bright spots. He ran hard, despite being swarmed nearly every play by defenders because the O line was swiss cheese.If you're going to quote Barlow vs. Gore stats, it's very difficult to compare the two. Gore got a lot of his yards in garbage time when Ds were set up to stop the pass (72 yd run vs. Washington's 2nd string D late in the game). Gore did look good in the last couple of games, though Houston certainly had one of the worst defenses in the league.Are you kidding me? What exactly do you consider reasonably well? Is it his astounding 3.3 ypc average? Or is it the amazing feat of rushing for 27 yards less than Gore.... with 49 more attempts? If you're going on the fact that the team around him totally sucked I'll give you that, but he was certainly part of the problem, not one of the bright spots.Barlow played reasonably well last year considering the state of the team -- he was one of the few bright spots.It's really time to pull the plug on Barlow. I would have thought last year would have sealed his fate but the 49ers apparantly just can't get enough of this bad RB.
I'm not saying Barlow is better than Gore (I think a healthy Gore is significantly better than Barlow) I'm just saying Barlow ran hard and looked pretty good, he wasn't part of the problem IMO. He's a decent RB but not a guy who can compensate for a poor offensive line/WRs/QB.
Sure, I can defend the fact that I have a heck of a RB#2 in Gore/Barlow.... I do not expect more than #2 value from them and they will provide good value for me. I do not expect RB#1 or Top 15 Value though. Why is it amazing to you that others have faith in the research they have conducted or in opportunity at good value compared to a "reach" at a skill position.When will people realize that Gore is a gimp?
I'm always amazed to what lengths people will go to defend players on their fantasy rosters. The Gore owners still believe they drafted themselves a heck of a RB in the 2nd round of their dynasty drafts.![]()