Steven in MD Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Over the last 10 years, the Bills have consistently had running backs who have had 1-2 great seasons, but could not sustain it. I am not saying that McGahee falls into this category, more saying that we should be more cautious. Not since Thurman Thomas have we had a truly consistent RB. Players like Holmes, Smith, Bryson, Morris and Henry fill my minds with potential based on a few seasons, but ultimately never panned out. I am just a little reserved about McGahee until I see a full year as the #1 back, and probably 2-3 yrs of consistent production.
stevestojan Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 You won't be happy until you see 2-3 years of production? Holy too-high-of-expectations, batman. Enjoy what we have now. A guy who started three games and ran for over 100 in EACH one, who took the spot of a guy who people thought was great, but was shown up by basically a rookie! Ok, I guess we should wait until the beginning of the 2008 season to be excited about McGahee. This post is just retarded.
BRH Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Mentioning Darick Holmes, Shawn Bryson and Sammy Morris in the same category as Willis McGahee? Gee, you forgot Jonathan Linton. And Antowain Smith had a few good runs here and there, but come on. Willis has shown me more in three games than A-Strain did in three years here. And I wouldn't say Henry "never panned out." He was good, damn good. Willis is better.
DC Tom Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Over the last 10 years, the Bills have consistently had running backs who have had 1-2 great seasons, but could not sustain it. I am not saying that McGahee falls into this category, more saying that we should be more cautious. Not since Thurman Thomas have we had a truly consistent RB. Players like Holmes, Smith, Bryson, Morris and Henry fill my minds with potential based on a few seasons, but ultimately never panned out. I am just a little reserved about McGahee until I see a full year as the #1 back, and probably 2-3 yrs of consistent production. 111230[/snapback] Because right now he's not only the best back on the team, he's the most productive we've had in years. I'm just happy he can pick up the blitz. That alone, in my opinion, makes him far better than Henry.
Realist Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Also the expectations of WM are much higher, being a first round draft choice. Most of the others were just second rate backs. McGahee was a talent from the start until the knee injury at least. Although, I'm more cautiously excited about him than the rest. I'd like to see him get through the year first.
stevestojan Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 I'm just happy he can pick up the blitz. That alone, in my opinion, makes him far better than Henry. 111251[/snapback] Bingo. Henry's 215. McGahee's 225. No reason he should excel at blocking as much as he does over Henry.
Kelly the Dog Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Over the last 10 years, the Bills have consistently had running backs who have had 1-2 great seasons, but could not sustain it. I am not saying that McGahee falls into this category, more saying that we should be more cautious. Not since Thurman Thomas have we had a truly consistent RB. Players like Holmes, Smith, Bryson, Morris and Henry fill my minds with potential based on a few seasons, but ultimately never panned out. I am just a little reserved about McGahee until I see a full year as the #1 back, and probably 2-3 yrs of consistent production. 111230[/snapback] ummmm... because he is a great back and has never been anything other than a great back? He was great in high school and recruited to the best school for running backs in the country at one of the biggest programs at the highest level of competition. He was great at that school, having the very greatest season any of their other great running backs has ever had. He was considered great by every scout and every GM and most every fan, especially the ones that watched him, and was going to be the top RB taken in the draft and one of the top players. He scored three TDs in his first scrimmage and has been pretty damn great every time he has played, including every time that he has started. You cannot count guys that had a good pre-season or a few good games in the pros in the same way you do McGahee because they were good but not great college players. They were good but not great prospects. They were not thought of as great by scouts and GMs. They did not have the best seasons at major colleges against the toughest competition. They did not possess ALL of the skills needed for greatness.
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 People are hyped because in modern American society (and thus in the NFL which happens to be a small minuscule part of American society unless you take betting into acciount and then its huge) THE FUTURE IS NOW. What have you done for me lately is the slogan of importance. Historic data is important but only to the extent it impacts my fantasy league team niw. Trends are important but pale in significance to the next game. There is some logic to all of this as worst to first has become posssible in the National Football Lotto like never before. Its a real truism that teams tend to do better when they take it one game at a time (in other sports for example the Red Sox were done when they were down 0-3 to the Yankees, but by totally defying the trends they are WS Champions today). Why are folks so hyped about Willis regardless of the true facts you recite: 1. Great story- The bou had it all as he romped through the record book with UM andin the blink of an eye and a vicious hit it all seemed to be gone, but. 2. He worked hard- He and his team of reps like the obnoxious Rosenhaus miraculously were able to build his young strong shattered body into shape to do a showcase workout just prior to the draft. 3. TD and the big boys took a risk- Ironically, the showcase workout meant little to the Bills whose Docs made the correct diagnosis that he had many tears but they were all pretty clean and with diligence and slow steady work they could be repaired. Most important they had a 14oo yard RB in the fold so they could take their time with his recovery. 4. In a rarity for America where dumb luck and Ken Lay nastiness often seem to pay off, this all worked out to deliver a good outcome. Perhaps the more real question is not why are people so hyped (it seems fairly obvious), it's why are our attention spans so short that we will be totally hyped about something else tomorrow. I think it was Hollywood Henderson (or maybe it was Duane Thomas) who asked about the SB? If it is so important than why do they play it over again every year?
1billsfan Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Over the last 10 years, the Bills have consistently had running backs who have had 1-2 great seasons, but could not sustain it. I am not saying that McGahee falls into this category, more saying that we should be more cautious. Not since Thurman Thomas have we had a truly consistent RB. Players like Holmes, Smith, Bryson, Morris and Henry fill my minds with potential based on a few seasons, but ultimately never panned out. I am just a little reserved about McGahee until I see a full year as the #1 back, and probably 2-3 yrs of consistent production. 111230[/snapback] Get out from under that rock of despair you are living under. McGahee has skills that a three year old can see. I fully expect him to rise to the top backs in the NFL in very short time. You can't teach god given talent like his and you certainly can't teach the drive and attitude this kid brings. You can wait 3 years pal, but I'll be giving him his props and sing his praise until he proves otherwise.
Steven in MD Posted November 10, 2004 Author Posted November 10, 2004 Get out from under that rock of despair you are living under. McGahee has skills that a three year old can see. I fully expect him to rise to the top backs in the NFL in very short time. You can't teach god given talent like his and you certainly can't teach the drive and attitude this kid brings. You can wait 3 years pal, but I'll be giving him his props and sing his praise until he proves otherwise. 111300[/snapback] I should have said I sing his praise, but time will tell if he will be that super stud we all expect him to be. I am not trying to be negative, I just know that the first game he runs for 60 yds on 25 carries, we will be asking for his head. I guess it is true...as fans we live in the moment...and the moment is WM right now.
gantrules Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 McGahee is so hyped by us b/c he's the first draft pick in forever that has actually produced when stepping in to his role. And I think he deserves the praise b/c when he has a bad game he's going to get the beating.
Like A Mofo Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 You think Willis is hyped playing in Buffalo? Could you imagine if Willis was doing this for Dallas or another high profile team at this point? Willis was a HIGH profile player in college, hence, the hype.
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 McGahee is so hyped by us b/c he's the first draft pick in forever that has actually produced when stepping in to his role. And I think he deserves the praise b/c when he has a bad game he's going to get the beating. 111443[/snapback] What do you defined as produced? What do you define as forever? How is his "role" defined. I ask these questions because I think one can easily define them as it being a true statement that WM is the first Bills draft pick since Bruce Smith produce when stepping into his defined role or alternately one can also truthfully say that Nate Clements or Travis Henry produced when they stepped into their role. So your post raises more questions than it answers.
eball Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 ummmm... because he is a great back and has never been anything other than a great back? He was great in high school and recruited to the best school for running backs in the country at one of the biggest programs at the highest level of competition. He was great at that school, having the very greatest season any of their other great running backs has ever had. He was considered great by every scout and every GM and most every fan, especially the ones that watched him, and was going to be the top RB taken in the draft and one of the top players. He scored three TDs in his first scrimmage and has been pretty damn great every time he has played, including every time that he has started. You cannot count guys that had a good pre-season or a few good games in the pros in the same way you do McGahee because they were good but not great college players. They were good but not great prospects. They were not thought of as great by scouts and GMs. They did not have the best seasons at major colleges against the toughest competition. They did not possess ALL of the skills needed for greatness. 111259[/snapback] great post.
Recommended Posts