Ranking the NFL backfields (Bengals #6)

[*bfine32*]

(06-20-2015, 10:14 AM)djs7685 Wrote: It's hilarious that people are still arguing this without realizing that the skewed statistics alone show that LeVeon Bell just about single handedly outplayed both of our RBs combined last year. I mentioned that earlier, yet some people lack the intelligence to realize what I meant by that so they come back with "no it says duo you don't understand!" I'm not the one that's missing the point here.

Pittsburgh added a solid player in Williams who has put it on the field and has had a great career minus some injury issues. That's along with a guy that pretty much was on par with our 2 "great" RBs by himself.

Hill and Bernard aren't much more than paper talent until they prove themselves, which I think they will and will easily become #1 this season. Is it really hard to ask people to wait for results before crowning Bengals players???

I wish I had access to the old board. People were so ready to trade Gio or turn him into a receiver. Almost the entire board was ready to do it, but now he's part of the BEST RB duo in the league? Uhhh, sure thing, homers.

Sometimes it is best to just say "I might have misspoken" and move on, instead of just digging the hole deeper. Anybody that even knows a little bit about football would disagree with the assertion that only an extreme homer would suggest the Hill and Gio are a better duo than Bell and Williams. 

Jim Miller and Pat Kiwan were discussing this very thing on Sirius NFL Radio the other day. Miller gave the nod to Gio and Hill, while Kirwan gave the nod to Bell and Williams. Both agreed that it was very close and could go either way. I am glad djs didn't call in with his opinion and embarrass the fan base. 

You try to prove your point by stating "Look how much Bell did" and counter with "Look how few carries Williams got". Guess who will get fewer carries if Williams gets more carries in Pittsburgh? Keep in mind that the 2nd most carries in Pittsburgh last year was only 65. 

You really don't need access to the old boards to read ridiculous assertions;  one can do that right here in this very thread.