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!
Using a square peg in a round hole is not my problem. The Bucs didn't use him properly in 2011. If used properly the guy can be a beast. He showed that. If paired with a great complimentary back, I think he can be a solid play. He won't do much in PPR leagues as he doesn't catch well, but if he ever learns to pass block, he could be a nice yard gainer and nobody is going to spell him at the goal line.
i can agree with that. he does need a complimentary back, starter he is not.
Nobody is grabbing Blount and thinking they have a starter. A LOT of things have to fall into place. He needs to be traded/cut. He needs to go to a team that will not try to move hin to FB or needs a banger to go with a nice COP back, or goes to a team with an established starter or stays in TB and in either case the starter suffers a major injury. That's a lot of ifs, which is why he can be grabbed for cheap.
In the league I own Blount, all of those players are on rosters. I don't have the luxury of grabbing backups like I'm walking through the produce aisle trying to find a good apple that only needs a little shining.
this thread is about starters. thanks for making my point!
And all of the guys mentioned here have to have something happen for them to become starters, (trade, cut, injury, combo of these, etc). Not a single one of them is being penciled in as a fantasy starter in 2013 or even 2014. All of us are betting some things fall into place and we win with our end of the bench lottery ticket. I in no way proved your point except for maybe in that head of yours.
oh ok. if martin goes down i don't think blount is the starter, he'll need help on 3rd downs and passing plays. if i wanted a backup role player on the bucs roster it's michael smith, not blount.
Most of the players in this list would need some type of help in either early downs or 3rd downs; in addition to a trade or injury. The people that are holding onto Blount are doing so in the hopes he gets moved to a different team, like STL.
I agree Blount is worthy of mention on this thread, and has proven the most out of the names I see here.'werdnoynek said:
i disagree. brown, hunter, pierce or turbin are all around backs in my eyes. if the starter goes down in front of them they take over a full load.ETA: blount goes to STL, he's the same roleplayer he would be in TB if martin goes down.'jonboltz said:
The only one of them that is even remotely similarly valued as Blount is Hunter, and I disagree that he would carry the full load, and think he would absolutely be spelled a ton by LMJ.If Blount went to STL (or PGH, as another outside example), I can envision him getting 200 carries there. Whether you want to nit-pick about whether this would be a 'starter' or not, the carries would still be enough for fantasy value.
Very
If we extrapolate Blout's numbers over the entire season he would've had 277 carries and 1416 yards. That's the pace he was on. Someone will give the guy a chance, but just like in FFB, nobody in the NFL is going to pay too much for him with all the other issues he has. I should say someone will give the guy a chance, all except for TB. They have their guy and it seems Blount burned a bridge there. But his production in 2010 will earn him playing time somewhere, unless he stays in TB and Martin stays healthy...
that's impressive for blount, i admit. bryce brown, who is younger and much more talented than blount, had a nice little run with andy reid at the helm just one year ago (that's as far back as i can remember). his stats extrapolated from his 4 game stint (2 of which he was largely ignored) would come to 284 carries 1548 yards. now he also carries a risk since it would also include about 14 fumbles but i'd rather take a risk on an all around back with a much higher ceiling than a 1 dimensional back whose bad attitude and inability to learn is keeping him out of good graces with the teams he plays for.
If I was able to trade Blount for Bryce, I would have done so about a quarter-of-a-second after it was proposed. I don't think anyone would rather have Blount over Bryce.
i agree, though not really the point i'm trying to make here. we're talking about starting running backs in the future... people continue to say that blount could be a starter, but the bucs had a "starter" in blount with no one in front of him, gave him a shot and he didn't take it and run with it. if the eagles didn't have mccoy on the roster it would be browns job right now and i don't think we'd be seeing them taking an RB in the first round of the draft.ETA: i can understand holding out hope for a guy who had his shot and failed, but if i can get someone who has the opportunity and hasn't failed yet i'd much rather have them.
show me where i've said that. michael turner was successful when given an opportunity to be a starter - old age and loss of speed cost him his job. turner may not have caught many passes but he wasn't pulled on third down for being a liability like blount is.His biggest limiting factor is his attitude. Pass protection is about willingness more than anything else. We can go find lots of links, but living here his story is old and tired. He's constantly late to practice ($15K+ in fines), even to the point the team hired a car service to get him there. He's lazy and is wasting what has shown to be NFL caliber talent. When he's motivated and puts in the work, he sees the field and does what he's good at - run with the football, over and around people.His attitude is the one constant in everything you read about him - if he gets his head on straight, I think he has a chance to be a solid contributor. He started to say the right things last year instead of complaining, so maybe it took a hard-liner like Schiano to get him sorted out. Here's a quote from October:'jonboltz said:
He did that with the previous regime and then some guy wrote a fluff piece at the beginning of last year chronicaling that behavior but had nothing showing he did it under Schiano who did not have a car service picking him up and I never saw anything all year where he was fined. He had issues and the previous regime coddled him but Schiano has not and I have yet to see a single piece from his time under the new coaching staff where he was fined for being late or some other nonsense that knuckleheads do.The team owes him little. Cutting him costs them next to nothing yet they don't. Pretty telling if he indeed is lazy and constantly late.
Why do you keep using logic and reason? This guy can't discuss anything with any sanity. No RB's ever get a second chance in the league. Particularly one dimensional ones like Cedric Benson, er, I mean Blount.
great comparison.
Hmmmm. Rookie season, 67 carries for 272 yards and a 4.1 YPC. 1 catch 3 yardsSoph season 157 carries (15 games, no starts) 647 yards for a 4.1 YPC and 8 catches for 54 yardsthird season 196 carries (in 11 starts) for 674 yards and a 3.4 YPC and 17 catches for 123 yardsIn Blount's rookie season he had 201 carries in basically 11 games and rushed for 1007 yards and a 5.0 YPC. It took Benson three years just to get close to 200 carries and when he did, he did less with it than Blount. Yet he signed a deal with the Bengals after being cut and in his fifth season he busted off his first of three straight 1,000 seasons.So, yeah, I guess you're right. They aren't really comparable. Of these two one dimensional backs one was clearly better to start their careers. And that's Blount.great comparison.
Generally agree completely here, but keep in mind what we're talking about here: a dirt cheap flyer, no more, no less. There's a small group of RBs who are elite and can produce regardless of situation (which is certainly NOT Blount), and then a big pack of guys who are decent enough to have value depending on situation. Ryan Grant is a really good comparison, IMO, and the owner who grabbed him off the wire before he emerged in GB made out like a bandit. The owners who bought him at starting RB prices not so much, obviously, but given Blount's cost that's irrelevant.You've been banging the buy Mendenhall drum all offseason, even considering his borderline RB2 / RB3 pricetag. And although we disagree on Mendy's talent, I sort of agreed with you on him as a speculative buy. If he would have landed in Denver, you would have had a huge steal, and he might yet land in a better situation in 2014. Blount is THE EXACT SAME type of speculative buy. Less versatile than Mendenhall, but also definitely more dynamic purely as a runner. He'll cost you RB5 (or lower!) prices, but I'll throw that dart all day. Likely the power half of a committee? Sure. But that has value on a decent or better team. It's all about cost here...
one of them continued to start after they became a starter... one of them started then immediately lost their job. but of course we leave that out of the cherry picked statistics above.ETA since i know that will get picked apart: benson was named the bears starter in 2007, was injured, then got 2 DUIs in the offseason and was cut. the bengals picked him up on 1 year contract in 2008 - he started out as a back up but became a starter by week 7 and started for 4 years with the bengals and then 1 with the packers.Hmmmm. Rookie season, 67 carries for 272 yards and a 4.1 YPC. 1 catch 3 yardsSoph season 157 carries (15 games, no starts) 647 yards for a 4.1 YPC and 8 catches for 54 yardsthird season 196 carries (in 11 starts) for 674 yards and a 3.4 YPC and 17 catches for 123 yardsIn Blount's rookie season he had 201 carries in basically 11 games and rushed for 1007 yards and a 5.0 YPC. It took Benson three years just to get close to 200 carries and when he did, he did less with it than Blount. Yet he signed a deal with the Bengals after being cut and in his fifth season he busted off his first of three straight 1,000 seasons.So, yeah, I guess you're right. They aren't really comparable. Of these two one dimensional backs one was clearly better to start their careers. And that's Blount.great comparison.
Can't really argue against him if the price is low enough. Not a fan myself though. Very low expectations for him going forward. Would rather use the value/roster space elsewhere. As for Mendy, he was a first round pick and held down a starting job for 3 years. He's been a RB2 or better every season that he's been healthy. Not a great comparison for a one year wonder like Blount.
Blount held down the starting spot for two years and was beaten out by an outstanding player in Doug Martin. TB liked him enough to offer him another contract, cheap as it was.Mendenhall was beaten out by mediocre players in Redman and Dwyer, and was jettisoned by a RB-needy team who wanted nothing to do with him.Blount has a 4.6 career YPC with a poor to average team, Mendenhall's at 4.1 with a good team. Mendenhall's success has been based on one thing only: volume. He's not dynamic at all.They're definitely in the same tier, talent-wise.
and blount is?
Sounds like someone who held on to Blount for too long, and is now bitter about it. I know it's tough to trade a young RB coming off a solid season, but the shark move (as much as I hate that term)was to move him following his big year. He was an undrafted FA who was cut by his first team, and beyond that he had serious character issues.Due to his draft status, similar to Blount, people are skeptical of anointing Alfred Morris to RB1 status. And I have no poblem with that. Where a player is drafted is one of the best indicators we have to tell how good a career someone will have. Arian Foster and Wes Welker are the exceptions, not the rule.
The guy offers lots of solid information, and you counter with sour grapes. Quality response there.'Shanahanigans said:
Benson was trotted back out there over and over because he was drafted in the top 10 and had a massive contract. He was cut because of the DUI's? That had a little to do with it, but keep hanging your hat on that. How many times was Pacman Jones arrested before he was cut? The dude was cut because he did nothing in Chicago. Pretty sure that awful second year Blount had was still better than every year Benson had as a Bear. But hey, keep blaming the DUI's.'werdnoynek said:one of them continued to start after they became a starter... one of them started then immediately lost their job. but of course we leave that out of the cherry picked statistics above.ETA since i know that will get picked apart: benson was named the bears starter in 2007, was injured, then got 2 DUIs in the offseason and was cut. the bengals picked him up on 1 year contract in 2008 - he started out as a back up but became a starter by week 7 and started for 4 years with the bengals and then 1 with the packers.Hmmmm. Rookie season, 67 carries for 272 yards and a 4.1 YPC. 1 catch 3 yardsSoph season 157 carries (15 games, no starts) 647 yards for a 4.1 YPC and 8 catches for 54 yardsthird season 196 carries (in 11 starts) for 674 yards and a 3.4 YPC and 17 catches for 123 yardsIn Blount's rookie season he had 201 carries in basically 11 games and rushed for 1007 yards and a 5.0 YPC. It took Benson three years just to get close to 200 carries and when he did, he did less with it than Blount. Yet he signed a deal with the Bengals after being cut and in his fifth season he busted off his first of three straight 1,000 seasons.So, yeah, I guess you're right. They aren't really comparable. Of these two one dimensional backs one was clearly better to start their careers. And that's Blount.great comparison.
That was just the first sentence of my response, and I stand by that statement. His post screams of a Blount owner that held on too long, and is now trying to justify why he still made the right decision.What you claim is "solid information" is really just a bunch of fluff and speculation. His first point is that Blount overcame the Morris regime, in order to have a great year. Regardless if this is true, it is irrelevant, because we all agree that Blount did great that year. The questions about his future arose in the coming seasons.His second point is that he saw "ZERO garbage time" under Morris. Now, I didn't watch a lot of the Bucs that year, but this seems like a blanket statement that is devoid of supporting evidence. He goes on to bring up Blount throwing his coaching staff under the bus as if it's a good thing, and assures us that because he read somewhere that Blount was working on his catching he has surely improved. This point is almost all pure fluff and speculation.His third point claims that he never got a fair shot under Schiano because he called Martin a hamster. Again, this is simple speculation, not "solid information" as you perceive it. Even if it were true, him saying this brings to light his character issues and lack of intelligence. The fact is, coaches realize their job and reputation is on the line, if Schiano thought Blount gave him the best chance to win, he would be out there.His final point is that we can disregard any character issues before 2012, because that is after all an entire two years ago. I mean who remembers what happened all the way back then? He goes on to say Schiano is a d bag who doesn't like Blount, apparently at no fault of Blount's; Schiano just has it out for the poor guy. Sorry, but your Blount love has jaded you into thinking this post was full of "solid information", when in reality it was filled with speculation and logical fallacies.
Mendenhall was only "beaten out" after shredding his knee. Even then, Tomlin was calling him the "lead dog" as soon as he came back last season. He never really got back to 100% though, which the team's GM acknowledged. So they gave the other guys a chance, Mendenhall didn't handle the benching well, and that was his ticket out of town. Blount was replaced in a much different manner. Teams don't usually spend a first round pick on a RB if they're happy with their starter. The fact that they went out and spent a first rounder on Martin when they already had Blount in the fold speaks volumes about their opinion of LeGarrette. So does the fact that he only got 41 carries last season despite no major injury issues. He's just not that good.'Coeur de Lion said:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7746624/tampa-bay-buccaneers-coach-greg-schiano-legarrette-blount-fumble-sithttp://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/04/27/fantasy-spin-buccaneers-rb-doug-martin'FF Ninja said:
The poster you quoted was very clearly talking about off-the-field issues in regards to negative press. These are all on-the-field things.
a single negative thing written about him in 2012?
hard to get a grip on context with all the whining and personal attacks on schiano. my apologies. blount is obviously a priced pupil now after years of questionable antics ON and OFF the field.
This was a pretty cool thread until it turned into non-stop bickering over Blount.
This isn't excellent of me to say, but that guy is an idiot. Or a troll. Or both.
And the first one was written in March of 2012. There wasn't even a minicamp at that point. And the second one talks about Martin and Blount being a 1-2 punch like Bradshaw and Jacobs were in NY. It mentions Blount has hands of stone, but talks about it being a one two punch with the two more than it talks about Martin being the every down back. I'm not going to bother with someone regurgitating back links from a google search of "Blount sucks" without reading the links...
there's negative info in each of them! don't let your blount blinders get in the way.
You need to reread the context pic.
i've read it, it's hilarious. so there was nothing negative written about him off the field in 2012. ok, you got me!! moving on, there's plenty about him on the field in 2012, which for him is pretty important at this point if he expects to continue a career in the NFL. he could have had a miraculous change and become a model NFL player, but let's not ignore what he's done in the NFL the last 2 years. it may be more productive for us to talk about his regression from 2010, than his personality makeover.
