You don't think it is silly that most RBs need good blocking?I don't think its silly. There are plenty of backs out there who can do a little something on their own. Randle can't.
I just went back to read my post and couldn't find where I said that. Lemme check again....You don't think it is silly that most RBs need good blocking?
There are far more backs that need good blocking than don't need. A great back like McCoy is suffering greatly because of the injuries on his offensive line.
BS. I said that since day one. I said that on draft day.I am not waving my pom poms for Randle, but he is fine as a back up RB. It does show the power of booze though...if he does not like a player, no one likes him.
No, but you did say there are plenty of RBs who can do something on there own...you know, without help from the OL.I just went back to read my post and couldn't find where I said that. Lemme check again....
...nope I didn't say that.
I just went back to read my post and couldn't find where I said that. Lemme check again....BS. I said that since day one. I said that on draft day.
Asiata has responded well for Minnesota. Randle is Curvin Richards. He's not even Robert Lavette, and neither of those guys could run the ball even behind the Cowboys' great 90's lines. Of course Moose was shit as an NFL runner too, so it forced us to give Emmitt almost every carry.I don't think its unreasonable to have two guys on the roster that can carry the load if needed.
Same here. Check my reactions if you like.BS. I said that since day one. I said that on draft day.
I would, but there are no archives.Same here. Check my reactions if you like.
I don't really know what you mean there. I honestly don't but lets review the conversation.I just went back to read my post and couldn't find where I said that. Lemme check again....
...nope I didn't say that.
ravi - It's not just booze, Randle is all but incapable of making something out of nothing. He takes exactly what the OL will block and nothing more. Good when he gets great blocking and nothing when there's no blocking.
I don't think you can make that analysis right now. Most RBs need good blocking to be effective, so using that as some kind of slight is silly.
I know you don't need to with me because my word is like concrete.I would, but there are no archives.
Why are you saying that RBs don't need an offensive line?Randle could be ok to spell Murray but he is what he is, he's going to get what's blocked(which right now is quite abit) and not much after contact.
:outtahereWhy are you saying that RBs don't need an offensive line?