Who has best chance to debunk BMI and be an every down back? (1 Viewer)

[NajehHejan]

Please provide rationale along with vote. Thanks.

 

[Ozymandias]

No one, it is impossible. Unless you say the guy you like only needs to gain a few lbs, or is shorter than he's listed, or if the guy you don't like gained weight but was really this weight at his combine.

Or if he's taller or shorter than you would have liked or lighter or heavier than you would have liked or the combination of tall/light, heavy/short, light/short, heavy/tall combined with a high/low BMI tends to be a mystery wrapped in a riddle, inside an enema.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

No one, it is impossible. Unless you say the guy you like only needs to gain a few lbs, or is shorter than he's listed, or if the guy you don't like gained weight but was really this weight at his combine.

Or if he's taller or shorter than you would have liked or lighter or heavier than you would have liked or the combination of tall/light, heavy/short, light/short, heavy/tall combined with a high/low BMI tends to be a mystery wrapped in a riddle, inside an enema.

 

[Burning Sensation]

BMI has already been debunked, most recently by Adrian Peterson.

 

[gigantor]

BMI has already been debunked, most recently by Adrian Peterson.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

There's pretty clearly a typical minimum size for successful RBs. The higher the BMI the less weight they need; and vice versa.

The question is whether a hyper-talented player can succeed below that minimum size. In the past you've got Warrick Dunn and Marcus Allen as examples. But Dunn wasn't elite (IMO - he had some shortcomings) and Allen's career started 25 years ago.

Curiously enough, we've got two possible examples from this years draft: McFadden and Johnson are the first two RBs drafted in the last ten years who definitively meet all the other successful back criteria, but don't have the typical minimum size. In fact both are 1st round picks - which makes them fantastic test cases. Antonio Pittman also fits, but at draft pick 107 he's so borderline in terms of talent that he probably can't be counted on to answer the question.

So assuming they don't gain enough weight to qualify - and I don't believe they will - McFadden and Johnson will go a long way towards answering the question of whether there's really a minimum size, or (per Cal Bear's excellent arguments elsewhere) whether it's just unusual for a very talented player to be smaller than a typical minimum.

I suspect now that it's the latter, but I'm definitely looking forward to the answer either way.

 

[Burning Sensation]

BMI has already been debunked, most recently by Adrian Peterson.

I am basically saying there is no such thing as a bad BMI. Adrian Peterson has one of the leagues lowest for RB's and is considered one of the best three RB's in the league.

 

[gigantor]

BMI has already been debunked, most recently by Adrian Peterson.

I am basically saying there is no such thing as a bad BMI. Adrian Peterson has one of the leagues lowest for RB's and is considered one of the best three RB's in the league.

But is he an every down back?

 

[Burning Sensation]

BMI has already been debunked, most recently by Adrian Peterson.

I am basically saying there is no such thing as a bad BMI. Adrian Peterson has one of the leagues lowest for RB's and is considered one of the best three RB's in the league.

But is he an every down back?

Define every down back?

 

[gigantor]

BMI has already been debunked, most recently by Adrian Peterson.

I am basically saying there is no such thing as a bad BMI. Adrian Peterson has one of the leagues lowest for RB's and is considered one of the best three RB's in the league.

But is he an every down back?

Define every down back?

I don't know, I didn't start the poll..I would think a guy who can get ~300 carries while staying healthy all year would be my definition.ETA - from a fantasy perspective

 

[T Bell]

No one, it is impossible. Unless you say the guy you like only needs to gain a few lbs, or is shorter than he's listed, or if the guy you don't like gained weight but was really this weight at his combine.

Or if he's taller or shorter than you would have liked or lighter or heavier than you would have liked or the combination of tall/light, heavy/short, light/short, heavy/tall combined with a high/low BMI tends to be a mystery wrapped in a riddle, inside an enema.

(Sorry about the confusion with the aliases earlier.)

 

[Burning Sensation]

BMI has already been debunked, most recently by Adrian Peterson.

I am basically saying there is no such thing as a bad BMI. Adrian Peterson has one of the leagues lowest for RB's and is considered one of the best three RB's in the league.

But is he an every down back?

Define every down back?

I don't know, I didn't start the poll..I would think a guy who can get ~300 carries while staying healthy all year would be my definition.ETA - from a fantasy perspective

Well, if we define a "full time back" as one who gets at least 300 carries, only six RB's would have qualified last year. Two of which(Parker/Portis) do not have "ideal" BMI. Lendale White is another, and while his BMI might be "ideal" his BF% is far higher than a RB's should be.

 

[Plainsman]

No one, it is impossible. Unless you say the guy you like only needs to gain a few lbs, or is shorter than he's listed, or if the guy you don't like gained weight but was really this weight at his combine.

Or if he's taller or shorter than you would have liked or lighter or heavier than you would have liked or the combination of tall/light, heavy/short, light/short, heavy/tall combined with a high/low BMI tends to be a mystery wrapped in a riddle, inside an enema.

(Sorry about the confusion with the aliases earlier.)

Enigma? Maybe just an inside joke I am not aware of... :dunno:

 

[T Bell]

No one, it is impossible. Unless you say the guy you like only needs to gain a few lbs, or is shorter than he's listed, or if the guy you don't like gained weight but was really this weight at his combine.

Or if he's taller or shorter than you would have liked or lighter or heavier than you would have liked or the combination of tall/light, heavy/short, light/short, heavy/tall combined with a high/low BMI tends to be a mystery wrapped in a riddle, inside an enema.

(Sorry about the confusion with the aliases earlier.)

Enigma? Maybe just an inside joke I am not aware of... :dunno:

I'll bet this place is flush with humor if you know where to look for it.

 

[gigantor]

BMI has already been debunked, most recently by Adrian Peterson.

I am basically saying there is no such thing as a bad BMI. Adrian Peterson has one of the leagues lowest for RB's and is considered one of the best three RB's in the league.

But is he an every down back?

Define every down back?

I don't know, I didn't start the poll..I would think a guy who can get ~300 carries while staying healthy all year would be my definition.ETA - from a fantasy perspective

Well, if we define a "full time back" as one who gets at least 300 carries, only six RB's would have qualified last year. Two of which(Parker/Portis) do not have "ideal" BMI. Lendale White is another, and while his BMI might be "ideal" his BF% is far higher than a RB's should be.

But, I didn't say at least 300 carries