Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: ESPN ranks the running backs

  1. #21
    Hall of Famer AngryAsian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,014

    Re: ESPN ranks the running backs

    How Gore exploded out for SF. This is how Mendenhall will be for us this year.

  2. #22

    Re: ESPN ranks the running backs

    Quote Originally Posted by frankthetank1
    Quote Originally Posted by steelcityrules!!
    sorry guys, but If we're talking healthy RB's I would take portis over willie.
    not sure if that factored into the rankings or not.
    a healthy clinton portis i guess that would be similar to a dominant sean mahan huh?

    i agree with the rankings being garbage all those mentioned rb's from the u arent as good as willie. i also thought peterson being #2 is a bit high. i know he had the best rookie year for any rb ever but it was only one season
    not really. A healthy portis is a potential 2000 yard RB who can run between the tackles and take it to the house in the open field.

    a dominant mahan would mean switching him back to OG and sending him to the CFL.

  3. #23
    Hall of Famer AngryAsian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,014

    Re: ESPN ranks the running backs

    [quote=steelcityrules!!]
    Quote Originally Posted by frankthetank1
    Quote Originally Posted by "steelcityrules!!":e2f6i3u4
    sorry guys, but If we're talking healthy RB's I would take portis over willie.
    not sure if that factored into the rankings or not.
    a healthy clinton portis i guess that would be similar to a dominant sean mahan huh?

    i agree with the rankings being garbage all those mentioned rb's from the u arent as good as willie. i also thought peterson being #2 is a bit high. i know he had the best rookie year for any rb ever but it was only one season
    not really. A healthy portis is a potential 2000 yard RB who can run between the tackles and take it to the house in the open field.

    a dominant mahan would mean switching him back to OG and sending him to the CFL.[/quote:e2f6i3u4]



    That is pure comedy right there. ROTFLMAO!

  4. #24
    BIG FAN
    Guest

    Re: ESPN ranks the running backs

    [quote=asiansteel]
    Quote Originally Posted by steelcityrules!!
    Quote Originally Posted by frankthetank1
    Quote Originally Posted by "steelcityrules!!":2l9suim7
    sorry guys, but If we're talking healthy RB's I would take portis over willie.
    not sure if that factored into the rankings or not.
    a healthy clinton portis i guess that would be similar to a dominant sean mahan huh?

    i agree with the rankings being garbage all those mentioned rb's from the u arent as good as willie. i also thought peterson being #2 is a bit high. i know he had the best rookie year for any rb ever but it was only one season
    not really. A healthy portis is a potential 2000 yard RB who can run between the tackles and take it to the house in the open field.

    a dominant mahan would mean switching him back to OG and sending him to the CFL.


    That is pure comedy right there. ROTFLMAO![/quote:2l9suim7]

    Imagine the morphodite draft pick we could get!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •