RB Willis McGahee is STILL Overrated (1 Viewer)

[Stinger Ray]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3.  After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable.  After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable.  I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

maybe you should try the math. the guys sitting at 5 and 6 had slightly more lower rankings than did mcgahee causing them to slip just below him. also, if you know how averages work you would know that mcgahee would not need an average somewhere in the 4 range to be ranked 4th. in his case the average actually came out in the 5 range and so did the guy ranked at 5 (5.12 average gets the 4 spot, 5.78 gets the 5 spot).

 

[Stinger Ray]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3.  After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable.  After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable.  I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

What do you consider "many?" http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...c=157499&st=245

So, 4 people placed him 2/3 and it's considered "many." 3 people placed him in the teens and it considered "few."

25% is 'many'50+% is 'a lot'

10-25% is 'some'

well that will cause a problem right there

 

[wilked]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3. After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable. After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable. I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

maybe you should try the math. the guys sitting at 5 and 6 had slightly more lower rankings than did mcgahee causing them to slip just below him. also, if you know how averages work you would know that mcgahee would not need an average somewhere in the 4 range to be ranked 4th. in his case the average actually came out in the 5 range and so did the guy ranked at 5 (5.12 average gets the 4 spot, 5.78 gets the 5 spot).

Way to go, Kleck, yes I did know thatIt has already been shown that a bunch of FBGs staff lowered their projections of McGahee as the preseason went on, and those who had him at 2/3 came to their senses somewhat. Whether the threads by Joe T helped them see their folly or not, the end result is the same.

 

[wilked]

"Sharks" like jurb have shown me that Tiki will not be a top back this season, Williamson will be great value, and McGahee will be top 5

Thanks for the info

missed this one

 

[Stinger Ray]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3.  After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable.  After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable.  I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

maybe you should try the math. the guys sitting at 5 and 6 had slightly more lower rankings than did mcgahee causing them to slip just below him. also, if you know how averages work you would know that mcgahee would not need an average somewhere in the 4 range to be ranked 4th. in his case the average actually came out in the 5 range and so did the guy ranked at 5 (5.12 average gets the 4 spot, 5.78 gets the 5 spot).

Way to go, Kleck, yes I did know that

I no longer live with him, but you almost got it. search other users that have used that old ip address and you'll figure it out. may have to go back a year as my former name has not been used for some time.

 

[wilked]

I no longer live with him, but you almost got it. search other users that have used that old ip address and you'll figure it out. may have to go back a year as my former name has not been used for some time.

looks like a fun game, but then if McGahee drops out of the top 10 at end of season you will have created a whole new alias, and I will have to start all over. :(

 

[jurb26]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3. After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable. After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable. I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

maybe you should try the math. the guys sitting at 5 and 6 had slightly more lower rankings than did mcgahee causing them to slip just below him. also, if you know how averages work you would know that mcgahee would not need an average somewhere in the 4 range to be ranked 4th. in his case the average actually came out in the 5 range and so did the guy ranked at 5 (5.12 average gets the 4 spot, 5.78 gets the 5 spot).

Way to go, Kleck, yes I did know thatIt has already been shown that a bunch of FBGs staff lowered their projections of McGahee as the preseason went on, and those who had him at 2/3 came to their senses somewhat. Whether the threads by Joe T helped them see their folly or not, the end result is the same.

Yeah, it wouldn't have had anything to do with the fact that when the 1st projections came out SA was still in a contract disput and Holmes still had injury concerns.This thread should be pinned for educational reference on how to backtrack.

 

[jurb26]

"Sharks" like jurb have shown me that Tiki will not be a top back this season, Williamson will be great value, and McGahee will be top 5

Thanks for the info

missed this one

Barber, RB11 thus far this year, no longer top 10Williamson, WR 45 thus far this year, ADP of 59 and getting more involved weekly.

Willis, RB 8 right now

A lot can still change, but I don't think any of the things you found so outlandish are far from off, if off at all.

 

[Stinger Ray]

I no longer live with him, but you almost got it.  search other users that have used that old ip address and you'll figure it out.  may have to go back a year as my former name has not been used for some time.

looks like a fun game, but then if McGahee drops out of the top 10 at end of season you will have created a whole new alias, and I will have to start all over. :(

only if this name gets banned or timed out which i'm not intending on happening. the other name did which is why stinger was created.

 

[wilked]

"Sharks" like jurb have shown me that Tiki will not be a top back this season, Williamson will be great value, and McGahee will be top 5

Thanks for the info

missed this one

Barber, RB11 thus far this year, no longer top 10

XStill top 10 sonny

 

[wilked]

I no longer live with him, but you almost got it. search other users that have used that old ip address and you'll figure it out. may have to go back a year as my former name has not been used for some time.

looks like a fun game, but then if McGahee drops out of the top 10 at end of season you will have created a whole new alias, and I will have to start all over. :(

only if this name gets banned or timed out which i'm not intending on happening. the other name did which is why stinger was created.

Sure thing Kleck

 

[jurb26]

Still top 10 sonny

I used standard scoring for all... and no, he is not:http://www.profootballreference.com/players/BarbTi00.htm

 

[wilked]

Still top 10 sonny

I used standard scoring for all... and no, he is not:http://www.profootballreference.com/players/BarbTi00.htm

http://footballguys.com/05statsytdppg6.phpYour link has 4 games played for Tiki

 

[jurb26]

Still top 10 sonny

I used standard scoring for all... and no, he is not:http://www.profootballreference.com/players/BarbTi00.htm

http://footballguys.com/05statsytdppg6.phpYour link has 4 games played for Tiki

Ahh, yes I should have taken the ppg. Yes, I just realized they only listed 4 games for him. Thought these sites used the same numbers, guess not. Anyway, highjack over.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

FBG Staff Final RB rankings had McGahee ranked #6 overall with the following individual rankings:

4, 6, 10, 5, 7, 5, 5, 4, 6, 9, 6, 4, 13, 5, 5, 5, 11, 7

I don't have a copy of the earlier rankings, but I think this is where we were at when the season began.

According to JoeT and wilked, we were still overrating him at that point so I don't think the phantom #2 ranking by 1 person in April has much relevance to this discussion.

at "phantom"Good thing those earlier rankings are "mysteriously" unavailable.

QUICK, GO CHANGE THE HTML SO IT SHOWS HIM EXACTLY WHERE HE IS NOW!

did you not see the other thread I bumped?

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3.  After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable.  After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable.  I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

I bumped the original rankings in another McGahee thread yesterday.Nice theory though.

at "evidence is destroyed"

 

[wilked]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3. After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable. After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable. I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

I bumped the original rankings in another McGahee thread yesterday.Nice theory though.

at "evidence is destroyed"

Rude dude, the rankings you bumped had 4 people with rankings of either 2 or 3. What am I missing here?

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3.  After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable.  After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable.  I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

I bumped the original rankings in another McGahee thread yesterday.Nice theory though.

at "evidence is destroyed"

Rude dude, the rankings you bumped had 4 people with rankings of either 2 or 3. What am I missing here?

So, we've had 30 pages of discussion about McGahee being "overrated" all because of a handful of staff members who ranked him high in April? I don't think so.At the time, James and Alexander were free agents and Priest Holmes' health was somewhat in doubt and the threat of Larry Johnson in RBBC was very real. Given the information available at the time, it was not that unreasonable to drop those guys...and McGahee as the next best RB obviously got moved up as a result. As the situations cleared for those other top-4 RBs, McGahee settled back down to the #5 or #6 spot for most people. Joe (along with you and Scupper to a lesser extent) still had a problem with ranking him that high.

You guys can backtrack all you want by saying all you cared about were the initial rankings, but the fact remains that you also argued with me that ranking him #5 or #6 was too high (which is exactly where his staff consensus and ADP data placed him). At least Joe is being consistent in his apparent hatred of Willis and love for Julius Jones (Cowboys homer?) here. I'm not really sure what point you and Scup are trying to make though. That a #2 ranking in April was too high? I doubt you'd get anyone to dispute that point, even the person who had him ranked that high back in April. That's why people ADJUST their rankings during the offseason...nothing is finalized, and I doubt many people were drafting off those rankings back then. Like I said, once a few other situations began to crystallize, several RBs moved ahead of McGahee. Nothing unusual about that at all.

May have been in this thread or the other one, but Scupper mentioned having Curtis Martin initially ranked ahead of McGahee (who he had 8th). But, in some of his latest posts here, he mentions that he had McGahee as high as 6th when the season began. If you "sharks" were scaring everybody away from Willis and your arguments were so persuasive, why did your GB Scup increase his projections/ranking for Willis after hearing everything you had to say?

 

[Stinger Ray]

The earliest rankings showed that many FBG staff were way off, putting him at 2/3.  After a few "shark" pool posts my myself, Scupper, and JoeT it was shown that McGahee's TD pace from the previous year was way too high, a pace that was unsustainable.  After this a few FBG staff, Rude Dude included, lowered their projections to something a bit more reasonable.  I still felt he was a bit high at 5/6, liked him better in the 8-10 range, but was glad that we at least saved some sheep that would have followed te FBG rankings blindly.

there were not many. SA has always been up there along with Holmes and LT.

Now that the evidence is destroyed, there is no way to prove it. What can be pointed out is that a few staff had him in the 'teens, and by simple high school algebra some staff necessarily had him 2/3. Try the math yourself, see what you get

I bumped the original rankings in another McGahee thread yesterday.Nice theory though.

at "evidence is destroyed"

Rude dude, the rankings you bumped had 4 people with rankings of either 2 or 3. What am I missing here?

a clue

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

McGahee sets his sights high

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Running back's goal is NFL rushing title

By MARK GAUGHAN

News Sports Reporter

10/20/2005

Willis McGahee started slowly last season because he spent most of the first six weeks on the Buffalo Bills' bench.

This year he's off to a flying start and has some big goals in his sights.

"I want to be the best back in the NFL," McGahee said Wednesday. "There's only one thing on my mind right now, and that's leading the NFL and going after one guy, that's Shaun Alexander, he's on top."

McGahee's career-best 143-yard rushing game against the New York Jets on Sunday moved him up the NFL's statistical chart. He ranks fourth in the league in rushing yards with 604. Seattle's Alexander leads with 715, followed by Indianapolis' Edgerrin James (662) and San Diego's LaDainian Tomlinson (652).

Entering Sunday's game against the Oakland Raiders, the Bills have clearly defined their offensive focus: It's McGahee. He has 138 carries, more than any other back except for James, who has 142.

"I'm loving it," McGahee said of his workload. "I can't complain. Let's just hope it keeps going."

"He's been really spunked up these last couple games," guard Chris Villarrial said. "His legs never stop moving. He breaks tackles. He's not going to go down with an arm tackle. He's got all the tools and he's showing it."

Getting McGahee going figures to be the Bills' surest prescription for success on the road. Last year Buffalo's offense stumbled to a 13-10 defeat in Oakland. Travis Henry played most of the game for the Bills and managed just 67 yards on 21 carries.

The Raiders' defense ranks 28th in the NFL. It's 22nd against the run and 28th against the pass.

"He's a complete runner, he's got great vision, good change of direction and he's very powerful," Raiders coach Norv Turner said. "When you get that, it's contagious for everyone and guys finish blocks, guys stay alive. . . . It opens up things for everyone else."

McGahee, who turns 24 on Friday, has not broken any long runs yet. His longest gain is 27 yards. But he has frequently broken into the secondary. He has 17 gains of 10 or more yards in six games. Last year he had 32 in 11 starts.

McGahee seemed to show an extra burst on the Bills' second play against the Jets, a 23-yard run. He said he thinks his speed is improving.

"Oh yeah, most definitely. I feel it's coming back. It's coming back slowly. . . . I worked hard in the offseason. I knew it was going to pay off. It's coming."

"He's getting it back," said Bills back Shaud Williams. "He's got that burst. He's getting back to that Willis we've seen at The U (the University of Miami). He's still learning. Once he gets 100 percent comfortable with everything that's going on, it's going to be scary."

McGahee's success should make it easier for the Bills to pass. They rank 31st in passing yards. McGahee was able to run on the Jets despite the fact they showed plenty of eight-man fronts.

"When it's an eight-man front, the back has to beat one guy," Villarrial said. "We can't block everybody. Knowing he has the ball and he's either going to run them over for a yard or he's going to make them pay, it's nice to know he's back there. I've seen him forearm guys and flip them on their head."

"The eighth guy was maybe not standing directly in the box but he was in the vicinity," coach Mike Mularkey said. "It was single-high coverages for the majority of the game. He was in range to be involved in the run game. But our receivers did a nice job of getting to him, and Willis did a nice job of bouncing some things outside of him."

While McGahee has his goals set clearly in his mind, he says he's not looking ahead for himself or the team, which is tied for the AFC East lead.

"I'm approaching it the same way I've approached every week," he said. "I'm not going to get big-headed about the fact we're right there neck and neck. We just have to go out there and play every week. You can't let that sidetrack you."

LINK

 

[Stinger Ray]

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Is this thread going to get bumped every week until the season's over?

 

[MelvinTScupper]

I recall that Fazio initially had him ranked #2 overall. I believe Aaron also had him high, maybe not #2.

But No. 2 seems to be the point of contention here and I believe Aaron has already denied ever ranking McGahee that high. Seems to me if people are going to try to make a point like this they should have the facts ready at their disposal. Wouldn't you agree?

I would agree. To make it worse, the contention they have made is that SEVERAL ranked him this high. Well, if several did don't you think you could come up with at least a few names or more than just the 2 Willis "haters" would recall such an event?

Haters? I said I had him ranked 6 or 7th.Plus, if the consensus ranking was 4, clearly some had him ranked higher, some lower. Do you understand averages?

I seem to recall Melvin being a primary Willis hater, I should know.

Not in the top 10 anymore.

 

[Stinger Ray]

Is this thread going to get bumped every week until the season's over?

i just need some entertainment today. with nice sucking mcgahee did sunday, i'm hoping for some enjoyable posts from joet and co.

 

[MelvinTScupper]

Is this thread going to get bumped every week until the season's over?

i just need some entertainment today. with nice sucking mcgahee did sunday, i'm hoping for some enjoyable posts from joet and co.

You want me to post "I was right" every week?

 

[borribel]

At least Willis has outscored LT2 by a far margin (at least yesterday):

Name:     Rushing - ReceivingMc Gahee:  16/50  -   3/36Tomlinson: 17/7   -   4/26

 

[packersfan]

Is this thread going to get bumped every week until the season's over?

i just need some entertainment today. with nice sucking mcgahee did sunday, i'm hoping for some enjoyable posts from joet and co.

You want me to post "I was right" every week?

Considering how foolish that would be it's probably not in your best interests to do so.

 

[Vibe Raiders]

He's currently #8 Rated Running Back in our scoring system....which is works for me.

 

[packersfan]

He's currently #8 Rated Running Back in our scoring system....which is works for me.

Same here. He dropped from 6th to 8th in my league after yesterday. I certainly wasn't happy with McGahee's performance since I was expecting a huge game against the Raiders but overall I've had zero complaints. Well, just one: He continues to be hit or miss near the goal line. That was a problem last season too and it's cropping up again this season. The guy seems to get stuffed at the 1 an awful lot.

 

[MelvinTScupper]

Is this thread going to get bumped every week until the season's over?

i just need some entertainment today. with nice sucking mcgahee did sunday, i'm hoping for some enjoyable posts from joet and co.

You want me to post "I was right" every week?

Considering how foolish that would be it's probably not in your best interests to do so.

Okay, 6 out of 7 weeks.

 

[wilked]

On pace for 9.6

On pace for 10.7 with a TD in 4 consecutive games

pls update, tia

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

not looking too good for me on that bet.I'll live.still wonder how JoeT's manlove for Julius Jones is working out.

 

[Joe T]

not looking too good for me on that bet.

I'll live.

still wonder how JoeT's manlove for Julius Jones is working out.

You're getting as bad as TGunz about not knowing how to admit you were wrong.

 

[Joe T]

If you were drafting right now, how many RBs would you draft ahead of McGahee for the season going forward?

I think it would be tough to find 5 or 6 that would be obvious choices.

I'm thinking the following RBs would probably deserve to go ahead of McGahee if we were drafting right now:1. LT2

2. Alexander

3. James

4. Holmes

5. Barber

anyone else that you think would clearly belong ahead of him going forward?

Fixed.Jhoe T swings and whiffs yet again.

I would like to pin point a turning point in McGahee's season.Thanks again Gunz.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. If I had 24 hour access to the knowledge of which teams Gunz likes and dislikes during a football season I would own the sports books in vegas.

 

[Joe T]

oh no Gunz. please don't jinx McGahee now.

Your best point in this whole thread.

 

[Joe T]

If you were drafting right now, how many RBs would you draft ahead of McGahee for the season going forward?

I think it would be tough to find 5 or 6 that would be obvious choices.

I'm thinking the following RBs would probably deserve to go ahead of McGahee if we were drafting right now:1. LT2

2. Alexander

3. James

4. Holmes

5. Barber

anyone else that you think would clearly belong ahead of him going forward?

Fixed.Jhoe T swings and whiffs yet again.

I wouldn't even put Edge in there to be honest.

Lots of crow to be had boyz. Eat up.

 

[Joe T]

Paging Joe " :11: " T

Present.You still here GB?

 

[Joe T]

This is the best self-owning since Tommygunz in the FFA.

Nice work Joe.

eh?

 

[Joe T]

I have him ranked the lowest of any FBG staff (15th), so I guess I am in Joe T's camp on this one . . .

I've got him 16th.Welcome aboard!

I'm predicting many other riders on this train in the coming months.

You have him 16th.He is #4 in my league, most people don't play PPR leagues.

Admit you're wrong Joe T.

nah. I was spot on.

 

[Joe T]

#16 huh? For you to not admit you are wrong basically makes it not even fun to argue with you and just makes you an imbecile.

Where did I say I wasn't wrong? Edit: 6 games is not a season. No one is right or wrong yet.I think the guys touting him as #2 overall were a little wrong too.

The year is young GB.

Have a great season.

J

at this backpedal. 3 weeks ago you told me that Tatum Bell had proven to be a bust.Now you claim that the season is young?

Maxwell, your site is losing credibility FAST. You should insist that Joe " :11: " T stay out of the shark pool.

GB Tgunz. I'm serious.This guy is the biggest fade I've ever seen... anywhere. And I've seen a few.

 

[Joe T]

Willis McGahee = complete and total pwnership of anyone who ranked him outside of the top 10

I look forward to 10 more weeks of backpedaling by Joe T. I like how he said 'where did i say i wasn't wrong?' and then edited in 'nobody is right or wrong yet'.

Wrong on both counts it looks like.Eat up GB.

 

[Joe T]

What bizarro world are you living in where Joe T's McGahee at #16 is more accurate than FBG's 4th-6th?

Joe's a big boy, and talks quite a bit of smack - he can fend for himself Scup.

Or maybe JhoeT = MTS.

You can not make this #### up.

 

[Joe T]

Like I said before, the debate on this after 6 weeks is far from over.

After week 5 McGahee was the 13th best RB.

After week 6 McGahee is the 8th best RB.

You guys can fish all you want to, but this won't be decided for a couple of months.

All I can say is enjoy it while it lasts.

McGahee got the worst hex of all in this thread. Not the SI cover jinx, no not the Madden box cover jinz, he got the TommygunZ blessing.

I now am very comfortable that my June ranking of McGahee is safe.

carry on.

omg... this is great stuff here.

 

[Fullback Fro]

Joe T > higood luck tonight

 

[Joe T]

Joe T > hi

good luck tonight

Thanks GB.Were gonna need it.

Congrats on making the CG.

GL in the Big Playoffs.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

not looking too good for me on that bet.

I'll live.

still wonder how JoeT's manlove for Julius Jones is working out.

You're getting as bad as TGunz about not knowing how to admit you were wrong.

how was I wrong again?Willis McGahee will still wind up outperforming many of the RBs he was being compared against on draft day: Deuce, DDavis, Dillon, JLewis, Portis, KJones, JJones

 

[Joe T]

how was I wrong again?

Your ranking of McGahee.

 

[Joe T]

Willis McGahee will still wind up outperforming many of the RBs he was being compared against on draft day: Deuce, DDavis, Dillon, JLewis, Portis, KJones, JJones

Might want to take Portis out of that list GB.He's not going to catch him.

Nice try though. Also, KJones, J Lewis, and Dillon are not comparable. Deuce got injured.



He's comparable to a lot of guys. You failed to mention.

 

[tick dog]

He'll beef up his numbers against a depleted/injured MIA (#25 vs. rush) & NE (#22) in the AFC Least, a CINCY rush D (#25) that hasn't stopped anyone on the ground all season long, and last but not least, the woerful Jets (#30)...that said, CAR (#4) and DEN (#2) will be tough to say the least.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Also, KJones, J Lewis, and Dillon are not comparable.  Deuce got injured.



He's comparable to a lot of guys.  You failed to mention.

from our final preseason FBG expert rankings, these were the RBs ranked immediately before and after McGahee, along with their current ranking among RBs and ranking differential:4. P.Homes (19) -15

5. D.McAllister (34) -29

6. McGahee (14) -8

7. K.Jones (25) - 18

8. C.Portis (11) -3

9. T.Barber (4) +5

10. D.Davis (18) -8

11. J.Jones (28) -17

12. C.Dillon (24) -12

13. J.Lewis (30) -17

14. A.Green (49) -35

Looking only at rankings, McGahee has only underperformed his by 8 spots, which ties him for 3rd best among this group behind only Tiki Barber and Clinton Portis.

explain to me again how McGahee was a terrible choice at RB compared to some of these other guys. Only 2 of the 10 RBs (20%) ranked immediately below him (or just ahead) have outperformed him thus far.

Unless you were in here touting Barber as the most deserving of the #5 ranking (which I believe Bagger was, so he deserves credit for that), I don't think your predictions have been all that great at all.

The only guy I seem to recall you pumping up as a better choice than McGahee at #5 was Julius Jones, who missed time to injury and is now mired in RBBC hell.