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!
He'll post in a second he's on a poop break.
The distribution is 16/9 right now, Anderson is the lead back. Seriously, is anyone surprised to see Bell play some? He is talented, just not ready overall to be the lead back. I don't know if he ever will be, but he'll surely be used a fair amount.Seems like plenty of reason to be happy with Mike Anderson today! He again didn't get paydirt from 2 yards out, but converted on several short yardage situations. He's ripping some nice runs and has 3 receps for 27 yards.
Bell has come in as change of pace, much as expected, with one unexpected 3rd and 1 carry.
Just reporting the other side on this - but I can't argue that Bell is active in that role, just as suspected...
That said, I don't think he'll ever be a complete back and thus will potentially max out in a Warrick Dunn type role.
Quite apparent you have an agenda - posting drive comparisons before the drive is even over.wow - VERY rough drive for Bell -
2nd and 10 - 1 yard
1st and 10 - 2 yards
2nd and 8 - no gain
3rd and 8 - 5 yards
That won't get it done... we'll see though if/when he ever gets the chance.
I personally think that Bell is a little too much Quentin Griffin - not enough of a power runner to get that tough yard and break tackles between the tackles. He's damn fast, but once a defense is ready for him and/or used to him, they know how to deal with him rather well.
Edit: Comparison - latest drive:
Mike Anderson for 6 yards
Mike Anderson for 11 yards
Mike Anderson for 22 yards
T Bell for 1 yard
Bell is not back, per se
16 touches = "change of pace"?Seems like plenty of reason to be happy with Mike Anderson today! He again didn't get paydirt from 2 yards out, but converted on several short yardage situations. He's ripping some nice runs and has 3 receps for 27 yards.
Bell has come in as change of pace, much as expected, with one unexpected 3rd and 1 carry.
Just reporting the other side on this - but I can't argue that Bell is active in that role, just as suspected...
Not at all. It's one thing to point out facts that support your opinion, it's another thing to post deceptive numbers that are intellectually dishonest (drive comparisons before the drive is over) to support your opinion.This is a joke, right?Quite apparent you have an agenda - posting drive comparisons before the drive is even over.
So what's his "agenda," to get everyone to drop Bell so he can swoop in and get him on the cheap? Or maybe he's an Anderson owner who hopes Shanahan reads these message boards and will cause Bell to fall out of favor.An agenda?Not at all. It's one thing to point out facts that support your opinion, it's another thing to post deceptive numbers that are intellectually dishonest (drive comparisons before the drive is over) to support your opinion.This is a joke, right?Quite apparent you have an agenda - posting drive comparisons before the drive is even over.
An agenda? An agenda? In a Bronco RB thread? Shocking.
Intellectually dishonest?! My goodness, nice reach. Honestly man, nothing personal but it was the middle of a drive and I threw that up. HAD Bell done something good after that you could make a case that I purposely omitted to make a case, but I think he had a 3 or 4 yard run. I had fun with that, but I'm not being deceptive here at all with my posts. Sheesh.Not at all. It's one thing to point out facts that support your opinion, it's another thing to post deceptive numbers that are intellectually dishonest (drive comparisons before the drive is over) to support your opinion.This is a joke, right?Quite apparent you have an agenda - posting drive comparisons before the drive is even over.
Not to speak for Mr. Gunz, but I think the point he may be trying to make is that if the stats would have been reversed on those two drives, some Anderson owners (not necessarily you) would probably have said....After the first drive: "this is a crucial eat-the-clock drive and the fact that Anderson is in there proves that Shanahan doesn't trust Bell"
I think it will be this way all year.Anderson will be the "for sure" starter and get 18-22 carries.
I'd agree with this as being the most probable course of events, with the possible (maybe probable) insertion of Dayne into the lineup if Anderson gets injured. Shanahan did try Dayne very early in the game yesterday - one decent run & one carry on 3rd & short that for some reason Shanahan sent into the 1 hole, where Dayne (just like most other run attempts yesterday in between the OGs) went for no yardage. I don't see Dayne as having a significant role unless Anderson does get dinged - then it's role-the-dice time. It's Anderson w/ Bell as CoP.
I remember that pre-season thread on this and I was roundly refuted by everyone that Shanny (like they know him) doesn't do RBBC. I pointed to my evidence of the last 5-8 weeks (can't remember but not just 2-3 games) where with a healthy Bell and Droughns, the carries were split like a RBBC. If Bell/Anderson remain healthy all year, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see more games like this.
If you looked just at the boxscore you might think that was the case but if you look closer.....In the 1st MA carries 6-17 and right at the end of the qtr Bell gets 1-12. Bell continues to carry into the 2nd qtr getting 4-20 while MA runs 6-25. So at the half MA has 12-42 and Bell has 5-32.
What's your criteria for a RBBC? For me, even a run-first team that splits its carries 60-40 between two guys has the potential to provide your team with a viable RB2 or perhaps even a RB1 depending upon how successful they are moving the ball. I think Denver may be an example of this, but frankly I think Anderson will get more than 60% of the carries from here on out.
After the 1st quarter they essentially alternated each series. I'd say that is an RBBC.What's your criteria for a RBBC? For me, even a run-first team that splits its carries 60-40 between two guys has the potential to provide your team with a viable RB2 or perhaps even a RB1 depending upon how successful they are moving the ball. I think Denver may be an example of this, but frankly I think Anderson will get more than 60% of the carries from here on out.
I agree...different type of injury however.All Im saying is Bell WILL be playing a role this year, but as long as Anderson is healthy and effective...I see nothing more than 30% of the work for Bell.Bell just got hurt too though.
It is what it is. I certainly didn't expect Bell to get carries this week but he did and performed as well as MA for the majority of the game. You can take the numbers however you want to take them but for what it's worth Bell got the ball in the begining of the 4th quarter. I certainly didn't expect that and it only points to what looked (as of last week) like MA would be the primary ball carrier is not necessarily the case based on the FACT that midway through the 4th quarter they were nearly identical in rushes and yardage. This just shows that while many thought (myself included) that the job was MA's hands down may be a little premature. This battle looks like it may have many rounds.Right, so the guy who performed well late when they needed positive yardage to run the clock down is the one we think will lose carries to the 2nd year underachiever who averaged 2 ypc. Gotcha!
Quite apparent you have an agenda - posting drive comparisons before the drive is even over.wow - VERY rough drive for Bell -
2nd and 10 - 1 yard
1st and 10 - 2 yards
2nd and 8 - no gain
3rd and 8 - 5 yards
That won't get it done... we'll see though if/when he ever gets the chance.
I personally think that Bell is a little too much Quentin Griffin - not enough of a power runner to get that tough yard and break tackles between the tackles. He's damn fast, but once a defense is ready for him and/or used to him, they know how to deal with him rather well.
Edit: Comparison - latest drive:
Mike Anderson for 6 yards
Mike Anderson for 11 yards
Mike Anderson for 22 yards
T Bell for 1 yard
Bell is not back, per se
And Tommy has no agenda in this thread.Hopefully he will get enough carries to be a valuable #3. He was going in the 3rd round back in early August.
And to me, my criteria is that the carries are definitively split. I don't know how to qualify the ratio, but whether or not the team is run-first or the team can provide me with fantasy points is meaningless. When I think of LT, DD, A Green, SA, and others I think of no RBBC. There are some guys like Tiki who have a goal line back, there are some guys like Rudi that have a 3rd down/receiving back and there are some guys like Priest (this year) and MA who have guys that sub-in for them regularly.Based on yesterday's game I think MA/Bell smell a lot more like RBBC than all of the "Shanny doesn't run RBBC" crowd than even Priest does now that Larry keeps fumbling. People like to brand coaches, but the good ones use what they have got effectively. Remember how people thought that Gruden wasn't a guy that liked running games and that picking a RB in the draft didn't make sense? Parcells wasn't an aerial attack guy until he got to NE and then they threw the ball a ton with Bledsoe in his early years. Don Shula was a running game guy until he drafted Marino. Again, those examples are kind of off topic, but it was easy for Shanny to not be RBBC when Terrell Davis is running for 2000 yards or Portis has two phenomenal years or MA runs for about 1600 yars. Why can't he decide that he has two equivalent RBs and he is going to use them both this year? Oh, he can't because a bunch of fantasy guys said he couldn't.After the 1st quarter they essentially alternated each series. I'd say that is an RBBC.What's your criteria for a RBBC? For me, even a run-first team that splits its carries 60-40 between two guys has the potential to provide your team with a viable RB2 or perhaps even a RB1 depending upon how successful they are moving the ball. I think Denver may be an example of this, but frankly I think Anderson will get more than 60% of the carries from here on out.
When the workhorse got 26 touches, yeah.16 touches = "change of pace"?
Right. It would have been sheer idiocy to have started Mike Anderson this week. I mean, the scrub only got 115 yards rushing (at 5.0 per carry), and was only the team's SECOND leading receiver. What a disappointing effort, I was hoping for 160 yards, a score, and being the team's FIRST leading receiver.Stay faaaar far away from Denver guys. Stick with your real studs. Guys like Curtis Martin, Jamal Lewis, and Fred Taylor.
I think the fact that the game was in Florida had a lot to do with the split. Shanahan had a lot of problems in Miami with players getting fatigued and dehydrated from the heat and humidity. I remember reading after the game that the healthy split was designed to keep Anderson fresh. Anderson still wound up with 26 touches, too, so it's not like he was adversely affected by Bell getting carries.I suppose we'll see how this continues to play out, but I'm satisfied with any week where my workhorse back gets 25+ touches, regardless of how many his backup gets.
