ADVERTISEMENT

All the talk of AB

And nothing about Lev Bell?

Seems to me he took less money than offered by the Steelers,

To play for a team with an inferior OL.

Good riddance, Lev

Its Conner time.
For one, backs are commodities in today's league. Though im glad it opened things up for Conner, just about any good back can contribute about the same.

An elite wideout being lost, while still under contract yet, stings more. Harder to replace.

Plus ABs situation really exposed major, rather shocking inadequacies in Steeler management and coaching. That deserves more attention.

Bell got a little more guaranteed money for the deal he just signed than what he turned down last year. But he sacrificed 15 mil and a year in his prime which he'll never get back. I guess he didn't care.
 
Both are outta sight outta mind. Keep it that way. 93.7 the fan might have to close up shop, won't have nothing to talk about
 
Fitz basically won the Super Bowl vs the Steelers in the second half. But then the Steelers #1 receiver won the game with a spectacular catch in the waning seconds. At the time Holmes looked like he'd become an AB-like receiver here, but succumbed to the ganga. But that game was basically a two-fer of big WR plays.

The point isn't the Super Bowl itself, it's what the basis and focus of most modern offense today, and in particular what teams (and TV) think that people want, and it's passing and high scoring.

The impression is that running backs are the ditch diggers of the offense, you need them, but nobody is going or tuning in for a game with two 150 yards off tackle rushers and 8 yards in pass completions. I'm sure most coaches actually hate that, (esp. Duz for example) but they know what gets hired. And GMs and owners think they know what brings in the masses. Of course, winning does that better, but only one team (usually NE of course) can win.
 
Last edited:
Fitz basically won the Super Bowl vs the Steelers in the second half. But then the Steelers #1 receiver won the game with a spectacular catch in the waning seconds. At the time Holmes looked like he'd become an AB-like receiver here, but succumbed to the ganga. But that game was basically a two-fer of big WR plays.

The point isn't the Super Bowl itself, it's what the basis and focus of most modern offense today, and in particular what teams (and TV) think that people want, and it's passing and high scoring.

The impression is that running backs are the ditch diggers of the offense, you need them, but nobody is going or tuning in for a game with two 150 yards off tackle rushers and 8 yards in pass completions. I'm sure most coaches actually hate that, (esp. Duz for example) but they know what gets hired. And GMs and owners think they know what brings in the masses. Of course, winning does that better, but only one team (usually NE of course) can win.

Elite rbs like Bell are more valuable then WRs like AB. They are much more rare.
 
The Patriots don't have a great anything besides TE and QB. That must be the blueprint to win a SB according to Steel.
 
RBs like Bell provide more ways to attack a defense than a WR. If you've got 1, it's like playing with 12 on offense.
 
Which elite running backs have been carrying teams to Super Bowls?
Whover the patriots pull off the scrap heap.

Last 20 years...

Terell Davis
Marshall Faulk
Corey Dillon
Warrick Dunn
Willie Parker
Brandon Jacobs
Ray Rice
Marshawn Lynch

Basically, if you have Tom Brady you're an outlier.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT